SC asks CBI to prosecute Punjab Assembly speaker

The Supreme Court has ordered prosecution of Punjab Assembly Speaker Nirmal Singh Kahlon for allegedly taking bribes

The Supreme Court has ordered prosecution of Punjab Assembly Speaker Nirmal Singh Kahlon for allegedly taking bribes as State Minister between 1997 and 2002.

A bench of Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice Aftab Alam ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to start prosecuting Kahlon in a verdict delivered on October 22. The ruling, however, was released later, reports IANS.

The bench ordered prosecution of the Speaker, dismissing his appeal against a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling, which had ordered the CBI to probe the allegations that Kahlon as Rural Development and Panchayat Minister in the Akali Dal-BJP government between 1997 and 2002, Kahlon had accepted bribes.

Kahlon had approached the Apex court in 2005 contending that the high court was not empowered to order the CBI to take up the probe of any criminal case unless the state government entrusts the task to it.

While taking up Kahlon's plea in 2005, the Apex court had ordered the CBI to continue probing the case.

The Apex court, however, on October 22 dismissed Kahlon's plea and ordered the CBI to file its probe report in the relevant trial court of Punjab as the CBI probe was over by then.

The high court had in May 2003 ordered the Punjab gopvernment to hand over the investigation of the case to the CBI. The case involved acceptance of graft and several other irregularities in selection of 909 Panchayat Secretaries by the Akali Dal-BJP government.
Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/SC-asks-CBI-to-prosecute-Punjab-Assembly-speaker/

High court questions NHRC's judicial power

The Delhi High Court has asked the National Human Rights Commission to review its judicial power in view of a complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate

The Delhi High Court has asked the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to review its order directing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to pay Rs 50,000 as damages to an accused in a Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) violation case.

Justice Sunil Gaur asked the NHRC to examine its power to award damages and reconsider the order as he allowed a petition filed by the central government through the ED questioning the commission jurisdiction to pass an order on immediate relief, reports IANS.

In 2000, the NHRC directed ED to pay a compensation of Rs 50,000 to Prabhakar L Mehta on his complaint that he was being tortured by ED officials during raids at his residence in connection with an FERA violation by him in 1997.

According to the prosecution, in 1996 Mumbai-based Mehta illegally transferred foreign exchange worth more than Rs 4.60 billion from South Indian Bank, Mumbai, against a bogus import.

On Mehta's plea, the NHRC ordered an enquiry and following the enquiry report awarded an interim relief of Rs 50,000 to the victim. It asked the investigating agency to shell out the amount.
Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/High-court-questions-NHRCs-judicial-power/

SC seeks update on river-linking projects

A Supreme Court bench asked the central government to apprise it of the latest development on the river-linking projects

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a detailed status report from the government on the implementation of five river-linking projects in southern, western and central India.

A bench headed by Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan asked the central government to apprise it of the latest developments on the projects by the fourth week of January, reports IANS.

The bench, which also included Justice P Sathasivam and Justice JM Panchal, also asked Maharashtra and Gujarat to apprise the court of the reasons for the delay in signing a treaty between the two states for interlinking the Par, Tapti, Narmada, Daman Ganga and Pinjal rivers.

The bench also asked Tamil Nadu and Kerala to apprise the court of their differences in linking three rivers—Pamba, Achankoli and Vaippar—in their regions.

The apex court is seized of the issue since the very inception of the concept by erstwhile National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in 2000.

The bench of then Chief Justice YK Sabharwal had taken cognizance of the issue on its own and has been monitoring the implementation of the project since then.

It had been seeking status reports from the central government and various government agencies besides the state governments on river-linking and issuing directions to them to expedite the project.

The bench on Tuesday sought to examine the progress in implementing the five projects.Besides examining the projects in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, the other projects that the court sought to examine include those of interlinking the Ken and Betwa rivers in Madhya Pradesh.

The court also examined the progress in linking the Parbati, Kali Sindhu and Chambal rivers in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.

The fifth project that the court sought to examine was related to the interlinking of the Godavari and Krishna rivers involving Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.
Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/SC-seeks-update-on-river-linking-projects/

CJI office under RTI purview: Habibullah

The Chief Justice of India office comes under the purview of the Right to Information Act, Central Information Commission Chief Habibullah said

The office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) comes under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, Central Information Commission (CIC) Chief Wajahat Habibullah said.

"The CIC would soon hear some petitions pending on the issue," Habibullah said while delivering a talk on "Working of RTI Act issues and challenges" at Observer Research Foundation here.

He said he had discussions with the Lok Sabha Speaker and officials of the Rajya Sabha secretariat to improve flow of information regarding the functioning of Members of Parliament.

"The purview of the RTI has gone beyond central and state governments, encompassing any body which has received government funding. This includes institutions like distribution companies, stock exchanges and aided schools," he added.

Habibullah described the Official Secrets Act of 1923 as "complete anachronism" and said that commission has suggested the government to repeal it but no progress has been made on the issue.

He said the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act has also been brought under the RTI Act, which rural people are using.

He stressed the urgent need to bring in uniformity of the fees under the RTI Act to make it affordable to all citizens.

He said that the Commission should be empowered to take contempt action in case of poor compliance.

The CIC also admitted that the victimisation fear among some applicants is also a real problem and needs to be addressed.
Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/CJI-office-under-RTI-purview-Habibullah/

Follow policy conditions strictly: CONSUMER RIGHTS

Pushpa Girimaji

WHENEVER you buy an insurance policy, make sure that you read the policy conditions carefully and follow them stringently. I say this with particular reference to motor insurance claims where clients have lost out only because they failed to fulfil some simple policy conditions. Let us look at insurance claims pertaining to theft of a vehicle.
In all such cases, clients have to fulfil two important but simple policy conditions: (a) report to the police about the theft immediately; and (b) inform the insurance company without any delay.
In a case that came up before the apex court some time ago, for example, the main issue was whether the insurance company was right in rejecting the claim on the ground that the consumer had failed to report the theft of his truck to the police for several months.
It was quite possible that the aggrieved person was doing his own investigations and was sure of tracing the vehicle, and, therefore, did not file a first information report with the police. Whatever the reason, eventually, when he filed his claim papers, one of the first objections raised by the insurance company was that he had not reported the theft to the police immediately and, therefore, the claim ought to be rejected. The apex court, too, agreed with this view.
Now in a recent case decided by the national consumer disputes redressal commission, the central issue was whether the insurance company was justified in rejecting a claim on the ground that the consumer did not report the loss of vehicle to the insurance company immediately. In this case, following the theft of the vehicle parked in front of his house, the client lodged a police complaint without any delay. But he did not report the theft to the insurance company. He might have thought that he needed to inform the police only. It is also obvious that he was not aware of the policy condition. So when he eventually asked the insurance company to make good his loss—the vehicle was insured for Rs 1.85 lakh—the insurance company pointed to condition number 1 of the policy, which required the customer to inform the insurance company of the theft immediately, and said it was, therefore, rejecting the claim. The district consumer disputes redressal forum, before which the client had filed a complaint, came to his rescue and said since the theft was established and the police had closed the case, saying that the car could not be traced, the insurer was not right in repudiatingthe claim.
However, on the ground that the consumer had violated the policy condition and reported the theft to the insurance company only four months after its occurrence, it directed the insurer to settle the claim on non-standard basis at 75 cent of the loss. It also directed that the insurer pay 12 per cent interest on the amount. (Oriental Insurance v. Parvesh Chander Chadha, RP No 496of 2005).
Thus, for a theft that had taken place in January, 1995, the aggrieved person had to fight a long legal battle spanning over 13 years, and even then, got only 75 per cent of the claim amount, all because he had not followed a simple policy condition of writing to the insurance company about the theft.
So, whatever the policy, always read the conditions stipulated in the policy and follow them without fail. Of course, if the conditions are patently unfair, then you can always bring these to the notice of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA). The courts may also come to your aid if you have failed to follow a condition that is highly unfair and one-sided. But there is no escape in so far as certain basic policy conditions such as reporting the matter to the insurance company and the police are concerned.

Source:-Sunday, November 23, 2008 Spectrum The Tribune
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20081123/spectrum/rights.htm

For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in

Justice to go mobile in Karnataka

A specially designed bus 'justice on wheels' will be launched on Saturday in Karnataka. It will serve as a court room to conduct lok adalat

Karnataka is all set to take justice and legal literacy to the doorsteps of its people across the state, particularly to the poor as they cannot pay for the expensive and time-consuming court battles.

A specially designed bus will serve as a court room to conduct the lok adalat (people's court), reports IANS.

Lok adalat is a mechanism for speedy settlement of disputes through conciliation, compromise or arbitration.

It is not a substitute to the courts but supplements their function. For the financially weak, it is a relief as they need not pay any court or lawyer's fees for the lok adalats to take up their case.

Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan will launch the 'justice on wheels' service here on Saturday."Delivering social justice to one and all is our duty, and poor people from rural areas have either no access to legal aid or are not aware about its existence. Thus, the mobile justice van will be a tool for the poor people of Karnataka to get access to justice," Karnataka High Court Judge and Executive Chairman of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA) V Gopala Gowda said.

Christened Mobile Lok Adalat and Legal Literacy Chariot, the bus has been designed like a mini court room, Gowda said.

The mobile lok adalat will have a judicial official and a conciliator. The 'court room' has enough space to seat the litigants and their advocates, Gowda said."Along with solving small and petty cases, the mobile court will help in spreading legal awareness among the masses," he said.The launch of the service coincides with the opening of a two-day regional conference of southern states on 'Initiative on Supporting the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme Through State Legal Services Authorities' by Balakrishnan.

Karnataka will be the second state in the country, after Haryana, to come up with the idea of spreading legal awareness and providing legal aid to the poor villagers through mobile courts.

Each of Karnataka's 29 district legal services authorities will be entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring that the mobile court visits all villages under its jurisdiction."We're hoping the initiative will help the poor and needy to get justice at their doorsteps. Poor people generally cannot afford to come to taluk (sub-division) and district courts.

Our endeavour will ensure settlement of disputes of the rural people at their own home," said KL Manjunath, another judge of the Karnataka High Court and chairman of its legal services committee.

As a part of its endeavour to ensure speedy justice, KSLSA has also set up a 24-hour legal aid clinic at the Bangalore Mediation Centre."We've been trying all possible measures to provide legal aid and services to one and all at quickest possible time. We have succeeded in resolving and reaching settlement in several cases till date," Gowda said."The mobile lok adalat will start functioning from Bidar (a district in north Karnataka) very soon," he added.

Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/Justice-to-go-mobile-in-Karnataka/

Husband can seek divorce if wife aborts without his consent

7 Nov 2008,
A woman's act of undergoing abortion to terminate a pregnancy without the consent of her spouse amounts to mental cruelty and her husband is entitled to seek divorce on this ground, the Supreme Court has ruled in an important ruling.
The apex court upheld the plea of one Sudhir Kapur that he was entitled to seek divorce under the Hindu Marriages Act, as his wife Suman Kapur had undergone three abortions without his consent.
Sudhir claimed that his wife resorted to the abortions as she was more interested in pursuing her career in the US rather than bringing up a family.
He further claimed that Suman constantly insulted his parents and other family members.
A matrimonial court granted divorce to Sudhir on the basis that the charges had been established. The woman moved the Delhi High Court which confirmed the findings of the matrimonial court following which Suman, filed the appeal in the apex court.
The apex court after perusing the records and citing a number of judicial rulings said that the actions of Suman amounted to mental cruelty and her husband was entitled to a decree of divorce.
However, since Sudhir married another woman during the pendency of the appeal, the apex court directed him to pay a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to Suman.Source:- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Husband_can_seek_divorce_if_wife_aborts_without_consent/articleshow/3686902.cms

Bail, not jail, for minor offences: SC

8 Nov 2008, 0920
The once-prevalent liberal regime – bail is the rule and jail the exception – appears to be on its way back. Except those charged with heinous crimes, all accused should be granted bail, the Supreme Court said on Friday. "We are against filling up of jails with undertrials," said a Bench of CJI K G Balakrishnan and Justice C K Thakker while granting bail to Baba Amrik Singh, jailed since January last year for embezzling gold while preparing a "palanquin" that was taken to Pakistan in 2006.

While the move can help de-congest jails, it may turn out to be a push for the revival of the old liberal judicial approach where the accused, in keeping with the doctrine of the presumption of innocence, were released on bail.

The practice was abandoned, with lower courts often appearing to submit to the popular clamour for a tough hand against crimes.

The departure not just meant overcrowding in already congested jails, but also resulted in accused, especially the poor, remaining interned in prisons for periods far longer than they would have spent behind bars upon conviction.

"For minor offences, you cannot put the accused in jail for long and make them languish till the date of conviction," said the CJI, accepting the arguments of senior advocate Nidesh Gupta who appeared for the accused. The SC's reluctance to keep more and more undertrials in jails represents a ray of hope for nearly two lakh prison inmates awaiting trial in various cases. According to National Crime Records Bureau figures for the year 2006, nearly 54,000 undertrial prisoners were charged with murder. "Theft and attempt to murder were two IPC crimes under which there were a large number of undertrial prisoners — 23,434 for theft and 22,526 for attempt to murder," said NCRB statistics.

Tihar Jail in Delhi, one of the largest prisons in the world, fares no better compared to other jails in the country as far as the problem of overcrowding goes. With a capacity of 5,200 prisoners, it has nearly 9,500 inmates while around 50,000 undertrial prisoners go in and out of the prison throughout the year. It was this problem that had forced the Delhi high court to order holding of courts within the prison complex and grant bail to undertrials languishing there despite being charged for petty offences.

Times View

Making bail the rule and jail the exception is indeed the way to go. In fact, this principle follows logically from the fundamental premise of our legal system that a person is innocent until he or she is proven guilty. Making the refusal of bail rarer, however, must not be based on any attempt to reduce crowding of jails. In cases where the offence is really serious and letting the accused roam free may be harmful to society, it clearly makes sense to deny bail. Similarly, where the chances of evidence being tampered with or the accused fleeing are judged to be high, it would be justified to refuse bail. But, whether bail is granted or denied cannot be a matter of whim. Where bail is denied, there must be substantial grounds for doing so.
Source:- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Bail_not_jail_for_minor_offences_SC/articleshow/3687661.cms

Press conferences hamper probe: HC to cops

8 Nov 2008
The practice among top cops to address a press conference after every major crime came in for severe criticism from the Delhi High Court on Friday which questioned the current method of police-press information sharing.
Citing sensational murder cases like that of Aarushi and Saumya Vishwanathan as instances, a division bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar decried this habit of press conferences by policemen, saying it hampered probe and affected rights of the accused.

HC also issued notices to Delhi Police, the Union government and a news magazine for publishing a "confession" of an accused in the blast case, something which prompted HC’s observations on press conferences. "Is there any policy? What is the basis for such press conferences, we wish to know? They are not limited to imparting information but often go much beyond that.

It is a very serious matter," an agitated bench observed when informed that a news magazine had published a "confession" of one of those arrested by Delhi Police in connection with latest blasts on the very day of his arrest. Lawyers for the accused complained before HC that this needed to be probed as access was given to the reporter even before family members or lawyers of the accused could meet him. "These press conferences are held to disclose so called leads which turn out to be false later... this hampers the probe and rights of the accused," an anguished bench remarked, concerned over cops sharing information with media relating to investigations into cases.

When counsel for Delhi Police Mukta Gupta urged HC to issue a guideline on police press interaction in such cases, an irked bench shot back, "Why should courts tell you what to do? You are an investigating agency. Don’t you know how to preserve evidence?" the bench remarked, pointing towards the recent cases of Aarushi and TV journalist Saumya Vishwanathan, "These are glaring incidents and it has become common." The Union government also admitted that there is a need to bring a change in the system saying "it hurts one’s own foot."

Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniun agreed there is a need to draw a line between what information needs to be revealed in public interest and what is not supposed to be shared with the media. "People want to know as soon as possible what happened and often police officers, in order to dispel any rumour mongering, allow media access straight to the accused. However, a line has to be drawn between public interest and rights of accused which certainly cannot be prejudiced," Subramanium said adding that people also need to know what is going on in a case. HC was hearing a petition filed by an NGO, Act Now for Harmony and Democracy, seeking a judicial inquiry doubting the police version on the September 19 encounter in which one of its officials was also killed.

'No' to judicial probe into Jamia shootout

Delhi High Court on Friday refused to order a judicial inquiry into the Jamia Nagar police encounter in which two suspected terrorists allegedly involved in the Delhi serial blasts were killed. A bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar refused to express any opinion as the National Human Rights Commission is already examining the case and its (court's) interference may amount to carrying out a parallel inquiry. The NGO argued that "facts and circumstances caste serious doubts on the version of police officials." Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing for the NGO argued that "Even the NHRC guidelines say that a judicial inquiry be conducted in cases of encounter." He also put on record rejection of his RTI plea by Delhi Police where he had sought a copy of FIR and post mortem reports of all those who died, including inspector M C Sharma. Police denied it on the ground that Bhushan had no connection to the accused and release of information will hamper the probe.

Source:- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Press_conferences_hamper_probe_HC_to_cops/articleshow/3688243.cmsFor any query:- legalpoint@aol.in

Fairness in lucky draws:CONSUMER RIGHTS

Pushpa Girimaji

LIKE the previous years, this year too, during Diwali a number of ‘lucky draws’ are being offered at retail outlets, shopping malls and even at Diwali melas. A participant is required to write down his address and telephone number on a gift voucher and drop it in a box kept for the purpose. In most of the cases, one never gets to know the identity of the lucky winner. So long as you don’t get a call, you assume that you are not the lucky one and forget about the whole episode.
The definition of unfair trade practices under the Consumer Protection Act clearly states that withholding information about the final results of any scheme offering gifts, prizes or other items constitutes an unfair trade practice. Not giving the promised gift is also an unfair trade practice. The law also makes it clear that if such a scheme, offering prizes or gifts, is announced in a newspaper then the results should also be announced in a similar way and within a reasonable period of time. This ensures certain transparency. Where such announcements have not been made in any newspaper, the retailers should at least put up a board at the retail outlet announcing the prize and it should be displayed for at least a week. They should also announce it on their website. This way other participants can get information about the lucky winner.
There is another side to the story too. Sometimes you may win the bumper prize, yet not get what is due to you. Or you may have lost the receipt and on that ground, the organisers of the draw may deny you the prize.
Let me briefly relate three such cases where the consumer had to file a case in the consumer court to get the prize.
In the case of United Finance Company vs M.S. Subramanian (RP no 4023 of 2006), the company had announced a lucky draw for all those who invested in it. Subramanian deposited Rs 1,000 and was thrilled when he was informed that he had won the bumper prize of Rs 1 lakh.
But he realised that he had lost his deposit certificate. He was later denied the prize on the ground that he had failed to produce the certificate. His contention before the consumer court was that he had made an announcement in the newspaper about the loss of the certificate, in order to prevent its misuse. He was also willing to give the necessary indemnity bond. Yet, the company was not giving him the prize. The apex consumer court directed the company to pay.
Another interesting case is that of P. Raman, who won a Maruti Omni as a bumper prize, but was not given the promised prize. The Tamil Nadu Government had announced a district-level "gift-linked savings mobilisation scheme".

All those who invested over Rs 500 were eligible for the draw of lots and were given gift coupons. Raman, who had invested Rs 5,000 in a time deposit scheme, won the bumper prize. But he never got the prize and when he made enquiries, he was told that the prize was won by another Raman in the same village, who had also invested Rs 5000.
The consumer court, before which he filed a complaint, concluded that the complainant was indeed the winner and had been wrongly denied the bumper prize. The Directorate of Small Savings was therefore directed to hand over the keys of the car to Raman. (The Directorate of Small Savings vs P. Raman, RP NO 1157 of 2002)
In the case of Parmanand Prasad, though he had won Rs 2 lakh on a lottery ticket that he had bought, he was denied the prize money. This was on the ground that the bank to which he had given the winning ticket to be handed over to the lottery authorities had lost it. In this case, the National Commission directed the state lottery to pay Rs 2 lakh to the bank, after obtaining an indemnity bond. "The money, in turn, should be credited to the account of Prasad, along with 6 per cent interest calculated from October 29, 1998, till the payment to his account", the commission said. (Union Bank of India vs Prmanand Prasad, RP No2865 of 2003).
So, if you have a problem getting the promised prize or gift, remember, the consumer courts are there for you. However, remember to keep the cash receipt and the gift coupon, safe. It’s best to hand over the coupon only at the time of collecting the prize. In case you need to give it in early, keep a photocopy and get the person, who collects the original to give you a receipt for it.

Source:- The Tribune Sunday, November 2, 2008

US court reinstates Bhopal gas victims' case

The US court said the lower courts did not give the plaintiff enough notice to respond to Union Carbide's bid to dismiss the case

New York: A New York court has reinstated a case filed against Union Carbide by residents of India's Bhopal town who claim to have suffered serious health problems due to a gas leak from the company's plant in 1984, rated the world's worst industrial disaster.

On the night of December 2-3, 1984, a Union Carbide pesticide plant in the central Indian town of Bhopal spewed tonnes of poisonous methyl isocyanate gas, killing some 3,000 people instantly and many more later.

The lawsuit was filed in 2004 by a group of people who live in the vicinity of the pesticide plant in Bhopal. They claim they suffered serious health problems due to soil and water contamination in the area by the leakage of toxic gas from the plant run by Union Carbide, reports IANS.The case was previously dismissed by a trial court in 2006 and 2007.

Reinstating the case, the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals (Manhattan) on Monday said the lower courts did not give the plaintiff enough notice to respond to Union Carbide's bid to dismiss the case.

"We view this as a close case," US Circuit Judge Robert D Sack said. "But we think there is a reasonable likelihood that, in light of the peculiarly difficult procedural history of this and related litigation, the plaintiffs were not aware that they were in danger of an adverse grant of summary judgment based on the submissions prior to the district court's order converting the motion and then deciding it," he added.

Welcoming the court's decision, H Rajan Sharma, the attorney representing the Bhopal gas victims, said that the judgment would enable them to conduct a detailed study on the role of the Union Carbide in the contamination of groundwater in Bhopal.Sharma said the lawsuit is seeking cleanup, monitoring and damages for personal injury caused to about 20,000 individuals along with property damages.

The company, now owned by Dow Chemicals, had paid a compensation of US $470 million in 1989.In a statement, Union Carbide claimed Monday's judgment should not be interpreted as a ruling on the merits of the case and said the claims would be ultimately dismissed."The Second Circuit did not discuss the merits of the case or the merits of the trial judge's ruling of dismissal and its decision should not be interpreted as a ruling on the merits," the statement said.
Source:- http://www.igovernment.in/site/US-court-reinstates-Bhopal-gas-victims-case/

Saas-bahu drama shifts to court

One of the longest running soaps that has many a saas and bahu glued to the TV may soon have to script its end. Citing “viewer fatigue’’, STAR TV is axing Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi. But feisty producer Ekta Kapoor isn’t ready to wrap it up just yet. She has dragged STAR to court, to challenge the termination notice.

On Friday, the family drama became the subject of a bit of legal drama in the Bombay High Court. Lawyers for Balaji Telefilms sought suspension of the October 10 termination notice that they received from STAR TV. The channel had given the soap until November 10 to change its storyline and end the eight-year-old saga. Earlier this year, Balaji and STAR had signed an additional agreement to continue airing the serial until March. However, not wishing to drag the soap on after its TRPs fell and the termination clause kicked in, STAR shot off the notice.

STAR said its agreement with Balaji for content supply had been modified this August, linking the show’s continuation to its TRPs. According to STAR, its agreement with Balaji clearly said that if TRP fell by 20% of its June 2008 figures in any three months, the channel was entitled to terminate the show. The ratings fell by 32% between July and September 2008, it said.

But Balaji, represented by counsel Janak Dwarkadas, aghast at receiving mother-inlaw-like treatment after years of motherly nurturing, dismissed the “viewer-fatigue’’ theory. It denied that content was not up to the mark, and cited a clause in the agreement which said STAR had agreed to spend reasonably to promote the serial. STAR said it had spent and promoted the show adequately, but Balaji said the channel had scrimped and carried out the “promotion’’ between midnight and 6 am, when saas-bahus were sleeping.

Balaji said it had already appointed retired Justice B N Srikrishna as arbitrator and was willing to resolve the dispute. Even as its counsel stressed “urgency’’, Kapoor got no stay on the notice.

Source:- Source:- The Times of India 1 November 2008 P.9 New Delhi
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in

Set landfill unit deadline: HC to Gurgaon

Authorities Told To Chart Out Course Of Action In Dumping Case By Next Date Of Hearing

In an interim order in the case of illegal dumping of garbage in Gurgaon’s DLF area, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, on Friday, sought status reports from the concerned authorities. The order given by the court is being seen as amounting to close monitoring of the issue.

A two judge bench headed by Chief Justice Thirath Singh Thakur asked the authorities to give a time frame within which they would complete the state of the art landfill unit at the legally assigned site.

The bench also asked the authorities to show a pert chart on the course of action they intend to take in this matter by the next court hearing scheduled for December 17.

The authorities were unable to convince the bench that all the formalities regarding the land designated as the legal site for dumping have been completed. In this hearing, defendants comprised the counsel of HUDA and MCG.

Significantly, the municipal corporation of Faridabad was also made a respondent party in the case by the court. A group of agitating residents of DLF were also present in the court to build up pressure on the authorities. DLF residents have been battling for over a year to get illegal dumping of garbage near their residence stopped.

Sharda Amarnath, daughter-in-law of former cricketer Lala Amarnath, who had gone to Chandigarh with the group, said, ‘‘I am hopeful the government will keep its promise to speed up efforts to stop further dumping near the residential area. Each day is a grim reminder of the mistake we made by choosing to live in Gurgaon. The stench never leaves us and cough has become a permanent feature in our lives.’’

Source:- Source:- The Times of India 1 November 2008 P.6 New Delhi
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in

Right to free education gets a leg up

Cabinet Okays Bill, Over To Parliament

The Right to Education Bill, a big-ticket move to make education a fundamental right for every child in the 6-14 age group, was cleared by the Union Cabinet on Friday. It’s slated to be introduced in Parliament in December. If passed, one of the longest awaited political promises would be honoured.

Activists for universal education are, however, keeping their fingers crossed, for, it may go into limbo if the Bill is referred to the standing committee. If it’s not passed now, there is hardly any possibility of the RTE Bill being passed next year as the government will shift into election mode. This would mean the Bill will lapse and the new government would have to start work on it virtually from scratch.

If RTE becomes law, it would empower the six-yearold 86th Constitutional amendment that made free and compulsory education a fundamental right. The RTE Bill sets down guidelines for states and the Centre to execute and enforce this right. Earlier, education was part of the directive principles of state policy.

After being considered by a high-powered group for more than two years and facing stiff resistance from the ministries of finance and law and the Planning Commission, the Bill first went to the Cabinet in August but due to objection of the Planning Commission, it was referred to a GoM. This mainly looked into the finances of the scheme.

The earlier draft had said the financial sharing would be done as per discussions with the state governments but the GoM decided to make the central share more specific.

UNLOCKING LEARNING

Right to Education Bill seeks to make free & compulsory education a fundamental right

Aims at setting minimum standards for both public and private schools Prescribes pupil-teacher ratio of 40:1

Makes it compulsory for all private schools to reserve 25% of seats for poor neighbourhood children

Education as right to cost Rs 12000cr a yr

The government has slated to introduce the long awaited Right to Education Bill in Parliament in December. The Bill ensures fundamental right for children aged between 6-12.

While stating that both the Centre and states would be responsible for the finances, it said the Centre would prepare the capital and recurring expenditure and provide it as grants-in-aid to each state from time to time. The GoM also decided to consult the finance commission for additional resources. However, the share between the Centre and states is yet to be decided.

To cost the exchequer nearly Rs 12,000 crore every year, even private unaided schools would not be out of its ambit since 25% of seats would have to be reserved for poor children in the neighbourhood. On its part, the Centre would reimburse the cost to these schools.

The legislation has a host of features that stress not only on reaching out to every child in the 6-14 age category but also on quality and accountability of the state and education system. Sources said the legislation is aimed at dealing with criticism that state-run schools lag behind in quality. To ensure that the law gets effectively implemented, the Bill has provisions prohibiting teachers from undertaking private tuitions as well as not letting them being used for noneducational purposes.

To ensure that parents have equal stake in the system, the Bill provides for School Management Committees in all government and aided schools. Each committee would monitor and oversee the working of the school, manage its assets and ensure quality. There is also a provision that teacher vacancy should never exceed more than 10% of the total strength.

To monitor the implementation of the law, the Bill proposes a National Commission for Elementary Education to be headed by a chairperson. He would be appointed by a committee consisting of the PM, leaders of opposition in both Houses of Parliament, HRD minister and the Lok Sabha Speaker.

Will it finally become law in December?

Will the Right to Education Bill finally go through? Those who have been pushing for it are nervous. ‘‘The government will have to be really proactive if it wants to pass the Bill in the December session,’’ says Vinod Raina, one of its architects.

If the Bill is not passed in December, and elections are held around May 2009, the government may get another shot at passing the Bill if there’s another Lok Sabha session. But if elections are held around February, the December session will be this government’s last and the Bill will lapse.

There is an alternative. Although proposed legislations that have monetary implication are normally introduced in the Lok Sabha, the government could introduce this Bill in the Rajya Sabha. That way, it won’t lapse and can be carried forward by the next government.

40:1 student-teacher ratio, 25% quota for poor proposed

The Right to Education Bill is revolutionary in several respects. It aims at setting minimum standards for both public and private schools so that the quality of education improves throughout the country and current inequities are levelled. The pupil-teacher ratio prescribed by the Bill is 40:1.

A controversial clause in the Bill makes it compulsory for all private schools to reserve 25% of their seats for poor children from the neighbourhood. This includes elite ICSE and IB schools. Not surprisingly, the Bill was fiercely opposed by the private school lobby.

In a bid to drastically improve the quality of education, the Bill has outlawed nonformal education.

All non-formal schools across the country will have three years to upgrade themselves to formal schools, which provide the minimum standards prescribed by the Bill. The Bill has also done away with the contract system of appointing teachers. Currently, schools can appoint teachers on a contract basis and pay them a paltry sum of Rs 1,000 to Rs 1,500 a month, whether they are qualified or not. According to the Bill, all teachers, both in private and government schools, will be appointed on a permanent basis and given a full salary as long as they are qualified.

The bill was virtually buried for two years. In between, a mid-census correction reduced the child population by six million so budgets were halved from Rs 3,21,000 crore to Rs 1,51,000 crore. So a team of educationists, two of whom were involved in drafting the Bill, wrote a letter to the prime minister uprising him of the situation. The PM met them in August 2007 and a new draft of the bill was drawn up in February 2008. The Bill was tossed between several ministries, including law and finance, before it finally reached the Cabinet in August.

Source:- The Times of India 1 November 2008 P.1 New Delhi
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in