The Week That Was: The Bombay High Court

This week saw a number of important cases some up before the Bombay High Court. However, perhaps one of the most important develops was actually from the Supreme Court of India; the apex court has issued notice to the state of Maharashtra in a petition challenging the Bombay High Court’s decision on the Common Entrance Test for law in the state. The end of the week saw a full court reference for former Advocate General of Maharashtra and Senior Counsel CJ Sawant..Here is look at everything that happened in the Bombay High Court this week..Wednesday, August 31.Interim stay on GR making state procedure mandatory for NEET admissions.SS Kemkar and MS Karnik JJ granted interim relief to three deemed universities that had moved court seeking a stay on the government resolution that made it mandatory for them to to admit students on the basis of the State organised “Combined Counselling/Centralised Admission Process”..The bench also held that.“Petitioners shall admit the students strictly on the basis of ranking of the candidates in the list of NEET on the basis of inter se merit amongst the students who have applied to the Petitioner’s institution.”.Thursday, September 1.DGCA asked to take action against violators.VM Kanade and Swapna Joshi JJ asked the Directorate General of Civil Aviation to act against the violation of norms by buildings that lie in the approach funnel which is a space designated for safe landing and take off..The bench asked DGCA to take a decision on the action that is to be taken against the 112 buildings that are in violation of air safety norms within three months. The order came in a PIL that raises the issue concerning safety of air space around the airport. It is the petitioner, Yeshwant Shenoy’s contention that there is an encroachment on air space by a number of builders and developers..Friday, September 2.Ola, Uber needs to be regulated says state.In a petition seeking regulation on app based taxi services like Ola and Uber, the state government filed an affidavit stating that these services need to be regulated. According to the DNA, the affidavit states that a draft city taxi scheme was published on the transport department website, and accordingly suggestions and objections were called from different stake holders..This petition filed by Association of Radio Taxis contends that companies such as Uber and Ola were using cars with tourist permits for intra-city travel which is in violation of the Motor Vehicles Act. Previously the bench of Justices SC Dharmadhikari and BP Colabawalla had observed.“These cabs do not have the requisite permission, they don’t comply with the rules. There is no system in place to keep a check on all of this, the state needs to explain.”.However, this bench will not be hearing the matter any more as Colabawalla J recused himself.

The Week That Was: The Bombay High Court

Nitish Kashyap

Related Stories