Call Support +91-85588-96644
TCYonline

Login

Sign Up

Please enter a Username or Email ID
Please enter a password
Keep me logged in
Please enter your name
Please enter your mobile number
You can't leave Captcha Code empty
By submitting this form, you agree to the Terms & Privacy Policy.
OR

Sign Up via Facebook

Sign Up via Google

Sign Up via Twitter

Download Software
Tests given

Download TCY App

App Image
 
loading

LAW AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS - June 2022

Jun 2022

Jul 01, 2022

Kerala High Court Directs Union Ministry to Pass Orders on Emblems and Names Law

  • The Kerala High Court directed the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Government of India to pass an appropriate order through Secretary to the Government in the matter of deliberate dereliction of duty by the Inspector Station House Officer, Fort Kochi Police Station, in obeying the mandates of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.

Jun 29, 2022

SC Hears Pleas against "Extra Legal" Demolitions after Protests in Kanpur and Prayagraj

  • The Supreme Court heard the pleas against the "extra-legal" demolition of buildings linked to the accused involved in violent protests in Uttar Pradesh's Kanpur and Prayagraj over objectionable remarks made by now sacked two BJP functionaries on Prophet Mohammed.
  • A vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and J. B. Pardiwala heard the petitions filed by the Muslim body Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind.
  • The Jamiat had earlier filed another plea on the issue of demolition of buildings and other allegedly illegal structures in Jahangirpuri in the national capital.
  • The Uttar Pradesh government told the Supreme Court in an affidavit that the demolitions were undertaken in accordance with the law and the exercise was in no way meant to punish the accused for their involvement in violent protests following the remarks made by the BJP leaders against the Prophet.

Jun 28, 2022

SC Hears Centre's Plea against Tripura HC Order on Security Cover to Ambanis

  • The Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea by the Central Government against the Tripura High Court directive summoning Union Home Ministry officers in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the security cover provided to industrialist and Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani and his family.
  • A bench of Justices Surya Kant and J. B. Pardiwala agreed to the Centre's request to list the appeal against the interim order of the Tripura High Court urgently, after Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta informed the Bench that the HC had directed that officer from the Home Ministry be present with the documents related to the threat perception and that no further adjournment will be given.
  • The Solicitor General pointed out that the security cover is provided by Maharashtra government based upon Central Government's perception. "It is a Central security. The Tripura government has nothing to do. It's completely territorially barred. And in any case, individual security of one family — the Ambanis — can't be a subject matter of PIL.

Justice Satish Chandra Sharma Takes Oath as Chief Justice of Delhi High Court

  • Justice Satish Chandra Sharma took oath as Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court.
  • The oath was administered by Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena at Raj Niwas in Delhi.
  • Justice Satish Chandra Sharma has a vast experience in the field. He has served as Acting Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, prior to which he was serving in Madhya Pradesh High Court.
  • Justice Sharma known for his contribution to the field of law by being part of many universities.He is an avid reader and has written some papers too.
  • He has been part of many National law universities including National Law Institute University Bhopal where he is part of the advisory board.

Jun 27, 2022

Bombay High Court Disposes of PIL Alleging Lack of Draft in Digital Format of Goa Town and Countr...

  • The Bombay High Court of Goa disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed alleging that in absence of copies of the draft Outline Development Plans (ODPs) in the digital format, the members of public were experiencing considerable difficulties in lodging their objections, or suggestions in response to the notices under Section 35 of the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974.
  • The PIL was filed by NGO the Goa Bachao Abhiyan.
  • D. J. Pangam, Advocate General, made a statement before the Court that the Town and Country Planning Department will, hereafter, upload the draft Outline Development Plans (ODPs) within one week from the date of publication of notice under Section 35 of the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (said Act).
  • The Advocate General stated that the Town and Country Planning Department will comply with the above statement, provided the respective Planning and Development Authorities (PDAs) forward the draft ODPs in the digital format.

PIL in Supreme Court Challenges Places of Worship Act

  • The Supreme Court was moved by a Public Interest Litigation that challenged the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 by stating that the Act was taking away the rights of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs to restore their 'places of worship and pilgrimages,' which were destroyed by the barbaric invaders.
  • Filed by former Member of Parliament Chintamani Malviya through Advocate Rakesh Mishra, the PIL noted that though the Act excluded the birthplace of Lord Rama, but included the birthplace of Lord Krishna, though both were the incarnation of Lord Vishnu, the creator and were equally worshiped across the world.
  • The Act blatantly offends the right of Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs to restore, manage, maintain and administer the 'places of worship and pilgrimage' guaranteed under Article 26 of the Indian Constitution.

Jun 26, 2022

No Case under SC/ST Act if Abuse Not in Public, Says Karnataka High Court

  • The High Court of Karnataka said that for offences under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the hurling of casteist abuse must be in a public place.
  • It quashed a case pending against a person as it found that the alleged abuse was made in a basement of a building, where the victim and his co-workers alone were present.
  • Justice M. Nagaprasanna, in his verdict noted: "Two factors will emerge from a reading of the aforesaid statements– one being, the basement of the building was not a place of public view and two, only persons who claim to be present were the complainants and other employees of Jayakumar R.Nair or friends of the complainants.
Share on
Keep Yourself updated on Latest PTE Exam Pattern

Avail Free Topic-wise Tests and various other offers.