SC orders discontinuation of 'inhuman' hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran
Hearing a plea filed by the Handcart Pullers Association seeking the introduction of e-rickshaws in place of the manual hand-pulled rickshaws, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice N V Anjaria said, 'Permitting such a practice, which is against the basic concept of human dignity in a country like India, belittles the constitutional promises of social and economic justice.'
While referring to a scheme in Gujarat where the government issued e-rickshaws to locals in Kevadia on rent, the apex court told the Maharashtra government to come up with similar schemes and also ordered the setting up of Matheran Monitoring Committee, under the chairmanship of the district collector, which will be responsible to identify the people to whom the e-rickshaw licenses shall be issued. The court added that the beneficiaries could also include tribal women to ensure them a steady livelihood.
The bench also noted that the state government should not make an excuse of a lack of funds and said, 'We clarify that non-availability of funds cannot be an excuse for non-implementation of the aforesaid scheme. We earnestly hope that the state would tender necessary assistance in stopping such an inhumane practice.'
The court also told the state authorities to lay concrete paver blocks in Matheran and allow the local body to lay only clay paver blocks in the market area of the hill town, while making it clear that no paver blocks should be laid on the internal roads or the trekking routes of the hill town, which is the only pedestrian hill station in Asia and has been identified as an Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) by the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
7 minutes ago
- The Print
NaMo Lakshmi to Amma Canteen—the schemes that saved DMK's ‘Ungaludan Stalin' in Supreme Court
The top court on Wednesday set aside the high court's 31 July interim order restricting the state government from launching any welfare schemes in the name of any living personalities, and from using party insignia in such schemes. The Supreme Court said it was a common practice and that political battles should not be fought in courts. At the centre of the controversy was the implementation and publicity of the Tamil Nadu government's 'Ungaludan Stalin' (With You, Stalin) scheme launched in July. AIADMK MP Shanmugam approached the Madras High Court, objecting to the fact that the scheme was named after the incumbent chief minister, M.K. Stalin, and was being advertised with pictures of the DMK's party symbol. New Delhi: At least six welfare schemes are named after Prime Minister Narendra Modi, two after former Andhra Pradesh chief minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, and 29 are either named after former Tamil Nadu CM J. Jayalalithaa or advertised with her photograph. These schemes, listed in an application filed by Tamil Nadu's ruling DMK, prompted the Supreme Court to rule in the state government's favour Wednesday, giving the party a shot in the arm ahead of next year's assembly elections. The DMK had approached the Supreme Court challenging the high court order in an application filed on 5 August. It submitted almost three dozen such examples, at both the central and state levels, of government schemes named after political leaders, or their photos being used to advertise schemes. They included the 'NaMo Lakshmi Scheme', the 'NaMo Saraswati Yojana', 'NaMo E-tab', 'NaMo Lakshmi Scheme', and 'Pradhan Mantri Bharatiya Jan Aushadhi Pariyojana'. The DMK argued that several of these union government schemes have been named after Prime Minister Narendra Modi's political moniker 'NaMo'. It also attached photographs of 'Modi Ki Guarantee' advertisements. In another affidavit filed in the Madras High Court on 3 August, the DMK said that the AIADMK was in alliance with the BJP as a part of the NDA, and that 'the BJP Party has spent several thousand crores on advertisements of Union Government schemes, particularly projecting the name and photos of the incumbent Prime Minister'. 'From Covid vaccination certificates to railway tickets, the photographs and name of the incumbent PM are printed,' it said. The affidavit added that the union government has launched a scheme called 'Bharatiya Jan Pariyojana', which abbreviates to BJP. 'This scheme's colours are saffron and green, reflecting the colors of the ruling party,' it said. 'Political battles' In its application before the Supreme Court, the DMK had also listed down various schemes announced by AIADMK during Jayalalithaa's time in the name of Amma, under various government orders. They included 'Amma Canteen', 'Amma Mineral Water Plant', 'Amma Baby Care Kit', 'Amma Cement Supply Scheme', 'Amma Seeds', 'Amma Call Centre', 'Amma Parks', 'Amma Bio-Fertilizers', 'Amma Salt', and 'Amma Laptop'. The application also listed the 'Jagananna Vidya Deevena' and 'Jagananna Amma Vodi' schemes, named after Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy in Andhra Pradesh. The Supreme Court sided with the Tamil Nadu government on Wednesday and noted how common it is for schemes to be floated in the name of political party leaders. 'The naming of schemes in the name of political leaders is a phenomenon which is followed across the country. When such schemes are floated in the name of all leaders of political parties, we do not appreciate the anxiety of the petitioner to choose only one political party and one political leader,' the bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice N.V. Anjaria observed, while setting aside the Madras High Court order. The Supreme Court noted that the lawmaker rushed to the HC within three days of making a representation to the Election Commission of India (ECI), instead of waiting for a response and that he made sweeping, unsubstantiated allegations against the ECI, which, the SC said, were misconceived. The apex court reiterated that 'political battles should be settled before the electoral roll and courts should not be used for this'. It imposed costs of Rs 10 lakh on Shanmugam. 'At the cost of public funds' In his petition before the high court, Shanmugam had asserted that the latest scheme, named after Stalin, was just a rebranding of the 'Assured Maximum Service to Marginal People in All Villages' scheme launched by Tamil Nadu in 2013. 'The present scheme Ungaludan Stalin is substantially identical in structure and purpose, and is definitely not a new scheme introduced by the State government. At best it is a rebranding and renaming of an earlier scheme in order to portray a false picture as though it is the brainchild of the present Hon'ble Chief Minister, whose name the scheme carries,' the petition asserted. He told the high court that renaming the scheme after a political figure in an election year is 'clearly an attempt to garner personal publicity for a politician and his political party at the cost of public funds'. Shanmugam asserted that this was a direct use of party insignia in state-funded publicity, which, it said, was prohibited through judicial and electoral guidelines. The Madras High Court passed an interim order on this petition on 31 July, observing, 'Therefore, we are inclined to pass an interim order to the effect that while launching and operating government welfare schemes through various advertisements, the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag of respondent No.4 (DMK) shall not be included,' the high court had ordered. (Edited by Sugita Katyal) Also Read: Two realities of NEP: Sensory classrooms & hi-tech labs, to kids sitting on floor & no teachers
News18
31 minutes ago
- News18
Confident faith in judiciary will never be shaken: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia
New Delhi, Aug 8 (PTI) Outgoing Supreme Court judge Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia on Friday said he was confident that faith in the judiciary will never be shaken and the apex court will continue to be the 'torchbearer and custodian" of freedom and justice in the country. Speaking at a farewell function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Justice Dhulia, who is due to retire on August 9, said it is this faith of common people which has kept the judiciary and the system alive. While paying glowing tributes to Justice Dhulia for his contribution to the judiciary, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai recited the famous Hindi movie song line, which goes, 'Abhi na jao chhod kar ke dil abhi bhara nahi (don't just leave yet, for the heart longs for more)". 'I am confident that the faith in our courts and judiciary will never be shaken and the Supreme Court of India will continue to be the torchbearer and custodian of freedom and justice in this country," Justice Dhulia said. On the ceremonial bench earlier in the day, Justice Dhulia shared of having grown accustomed to hearing cases and lawyers from across the country and said, 'I am going to miss my Hindustan." At the farewell event, the CJI said Justice Dhulia's retirement from the court marks the close of a deeply distinguished chapter in India's judicial history. 'Over the course of his illustrious career as a judge, Justice Dhulia delivered several landmark decisions that have had a lasting impact on Indian jurisprudence," he said. Justice Dhulia verdicts touched upon a wide range of critical issues, from matters concerning transfer of property to individuals to safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens in the context of social justice, the CJI added. 'In a profession where power and authority can sometimes overshadow compassion, Justice Dhulia always remained grounded," he said. He also highlighted Justice Dhulia's earlier involvement with theatre and his deep passion for movies, especially Italian cinemas and timeless classics. 'Had he not chosen the legal profession, it is no exaggeration to say that Justice Dhulia would have excelled as a film maker or an actor," the CJI said. The CJI went on, 'On a lighter note, had Justice Dhulia stepped into his brother Tigmanshu's shoes to play the character of Ramadhir Singh in the 'Gangs of Wasseypur', I believe that the character would have still been unforgettable." Justice Dhulia's brother Tigmanshu Dhulia is a noted film maker. In his address, Justice Dhulia said being in the Supreme Court as a judge is always a challenge but is also very satisfying. 'One factor which distinguishes Supreme Court from all other courts is the pace of work, the pace with which the work is done here, particularly the Mondays and Fridays," he said. Justice Dhulia said in remote areas, when a villager is harassed or troubled by the system, he says he will go to the high court and get a stay. 'Now it is this faith, this faith in the common man, which has kept our judiciary and the system alive," he said. He stressed that lawyers must speak with courage and integrity and should always be fearless. Attorney General R Venkataramani, SCBA president and senior advocate Vikas Singh and others also addressed the gathering. The SCBA president lauded Justice Dhulia for his resolve to vacate official bungalow on the day of his retirement. He, however, apparently took a dig at former CJI D Y Chandrachud on his overstay in the official residence. 'Now we have had a recent example of a chief justice wanting to overstay. Chief justice is allowed six months only. He had already stayed in that house for eight months. I was surprised to see him using the ground of his disabled children," Singh said. 'He moved straight away to a government home, and he is not entitled to any government accommodation," he said. Interestingly, a month ago in an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court administration wrote to the Centre to vacate the official residence of the Chief Justice of India at 5, Krishna Menon Marg in Delhi, noting former CJI DY Chandrachud had stayed beyond the permissible period. Earlier in August, however, Justice Chandrachud vacated the official residence of the head of the judiciary. Born on August 10, 1960, Justice Dhulia assumed charge as a judge of the Supreme Court on May 9, 2022. He had started his legal practice in the Allahabad High Court, later moving to the Uttarakhand High Court upon its creation in 2000, where he rose to the position of senior advocate and was eventually elevated to the bench in 2008. He later took oath as the chief justice of the Gauhati High Court on January 10, 2021. PTI ABA ABA AMK AMK (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 08, 2025, 20:00 IST News agency-feeds Confident faith in judiciary will never be shaken: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
News18
36 minutes ago
- News18
Big Relief For Saif Ali Khan: SC Stays MP High Court Order In Bhopal Royal Estate Dispute
Last Updated: The Supreme Court has stayed a MP High Court order in a property dispute involving Saif Ali Khan's family over the inheritance of Bhopal's last Nawab, Hamidullah Khan's estate. The Supreme Court on Friday granted an interim stay on a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that had remanded a decades-old royal estate dispute, involving the family of actor Saif Ali Khan, back to a trial court for fresh adjudication, news agency PTI reported. The case concerns the inheritance of the estate of Bhopal's last Nawab, Hamidullah Khan. A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Atul Chandurkar issued notice on a petition filed by Omar Faruq Ali and Raashid Ali, descendants of the Nawab's elder brother, challenging the High Court's June 30 order. The dispute began in 1999 when extended family members of the Nawab, including the late Begum Suraiya Rashid and her children, sought partition and possession of the royal estate. In 2000, a trial court ruled in favor of the Nawab's daughter, Sajida Sultan, and her legal heirs — including her son Mansoor Ali Khan (former India cricket captain), daughter-in-law Sharmila Tagore and grandchildren Saif Ali Khan, Soha Ali Khan, Saba Sultan. The court held the estate was not governed by Muslim Personal Law but devolved upon Sajida under constitutional provisions. This judgment was based on a 1997 Allahabad High Court decision, which was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2019. Citing that, the Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside the 2000 trial court ruling but instead of applying the 2019 precedent, it ordered a fresh hearing. Senior advocate Devadutt Kamat, appearing for the petitioners, said the high court remand order was contrary to the procedural norms outlined under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), PTI reported. The Supreme Court has now stayed the remand order and will hear the matter further, keeping alive the long-running legal battle over the Nawab's estate. Following the Nawab's death in 1960, the Government of India issued a 1962 certificate recognising Sajida Sultan as both the ruler and rightful heir to the personal estate under Article 366(22) of the Constitution. The plaintiffs, however, contended the Nawab's personal estate should be distributed among all legal heirs under Muslim Personal Law. The respondents, including actor Saif Ali Khan and his family, argued succession followed the rule of primogeniture and Sajida Sultan had rightfully inherited both the royal title (Gaddi) and personal properties. While overturning the trial court ruling, the high court remanded the case. The petitioners moved the top court seeking reversal of the remand order. view comments First Published: August 08, 2025, 19:51 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
