logo
What's The Difference Between 'Aamchi' And 'Thyamchi' Mumbai? CJI Gavai Says…

What's The Difference Between 'Aamchi' And 'Thyamchi' Mumbai? CJI Gavai Says…

News1827-05-2025

Last Updated:
The bench of CJI Gavai Justice AG Masih refused to entertain the petition considering the fact that the Bombay High Court is already considering the issue.
A debate on the meanings of two popular Marathi epithets, ' Aamchi Mumbai' and ' Thyamchi Mumbai' was witnessed in the Supreme Court during a hearing on a petition challenging the Maharashtra Government's decision to construct a passenger jetty and terminal near the Gateway of India.
Typically in Marathi, ' Aamchi ' means ours, and ' Thyamchi ' means theirs. But for Mumbai, ' Aamchi ', is where common people live, and ' Thyamchi ' means where the elite live.
Chief Justice BR Gavai, while hearing the petition opined his take when senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, in a lighter vein, said, 'It's between ' Aamchi Mumbai' and ' Thyamchi Mumbai'- sometimes that is where the difference is," reported LiveLaw.
' Aamchi Mumbai doesn't live in Colaba. It is only ' Thyamchi Mumbai' which lives in Colaba. Aamchi Mumbai lives in Malad, Thane, Ghatkoppar," the CJI remarked.
The bench of CJI Gavai Justice AG Masih refused to entertain the petition considering the fact that the Bombay High Court is already considering the issue.
'It is like this – everyone wants a sewage treatment plant, but not behind my house. In the city, when something good is happening, everybody approaches the Supreme Court," the top court said.
At the same time, the apex court urged Bombay High Court to decide the matter before the end of the monsoon.
Hegde informed the bench that no public hearing was afforded before implementing the project plan. The project is 'nearly 10 acres of project right into the sea. He further stressed that it was not a 'stand alone jetty' as portrayed to be, where 5-10 boats are tied.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati appearing for the State, termed the submissions by the petitioner as 'misleading' and informed the bench that 7 specific permissions/ clearances have been taken by the authorities, which the petitioner has not placed on record. The permissions began back in 2021. She further added that 'it's absolutely wrong to say it's being created as a VIP terminal".
The petition was filed by the Clean and Heritage Colaba Residents Association, an association of over 400 residents of Colaba, along with the petitioner.
Why The Jetty Project Is Under Challenge?
Before the High Court, the petition states that the proposed construction, from a promenade 280 meters from the Gateway of India and located near the Radio Club, is ex facie illegal, irrational, arbitrary and destructive of the heritage area, LiveLaw reported.
The petition states that construction involves setting up a Terminal Platform for providing parking of 150 cars, VIP lounges/ waiting areas and ticket counters/ administrative areas along with a huge tennis racquet shaped jetty.
Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Assam teacher ‘pushed' into Bangladesh returns home two weeks after being detained
Assam teacher ‘pushed' into Bangladesh returns home two weeks after being detained

Scroll.in

timean hour ago

  • Scroll.in

Assam teacher ‘pushed' into Bangladesh returns home two weeks after being detained

Assam teacher Khairul Islam, who had been 'pushed' into Bangladesh on May 27 after picked by state border police, has returned to his ancestral home in Morigaon. His family told Scroll that he had reached home on Thursday evening. 'I pray that Muslims in Assam can remain in peace,' Islam told Scroll from his home at Khandapukhuri village on Eid. As Scroll had reported, the 51-year-old former government teacher had been detained his home on the night of May 23 by the border police and forced out of Indian territory along the Bangladesh border four days later along with 13 others who were claimed to be 'infiltrators'. In a video posted on Facebook a Bangladeshi journalist from Bangladesh's Rangpur division on May 27, Khairul Islam Islam could standing in a field between Assam's South Salamar district and Bangladesh's Kurigram district 'I told the Assam police that I am a teacher and asked them to respect me,' Islam had told the journalist. 'My hands were tied like I was a thief and I was made to sit in the bus. Around 4 am, I reached here.' Until December, Islam had been a teacher in a government school. In 2016, he had been declared a foreigner by a tribunal. Two years later, the Gauhati High Court upheld the tribunal's decision. Islam spent two years in Assam's Matia detention centre and was released on bail in August 2020. The appeal to the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's decision is pending. On Saturday, he described his ordeal to Scroll. 'I was taken by the police and the same police brought me home,' he said. On May 23, the Morigaon police to the office of the superintendent of police. He was then moved to the Matia detention camp, Islam said. A few days later, the Border Security Force took him from the camp and released him the no-man's land between India and Bangladesh. 'I spent two days in the no man's land,' Islam said. The group was eventually taken to a camp of the Bangladesh Border Guard. he said. 'A few days later, the BGB brought seven of us in the border from where the police took me in custody,' Islam said. 'I was in Assam police custody since we crossed the border from Bangladesh to India and they released me on Thursday evening.' He added: 'I don't exactly remember how many days we were in three days,' he said. 'There was no sleep on our eyes during those days. How don't know how we spent those days. I don't even remember. Days and nights were same.' Islam alleged that he had been beaten in Matia camp when he refused to get into a bus that he knew was heading for the border. '…I'm an Indian so why would I go to Bangladesh?' he said. 'When I told them that, they hit me inside the Matia Detention camp.' After Islam was picked up, his family had filed an application before the Morigaon superintendent of police seeking his release, attaching all the relevant documents. 'The SP had assured that he would be back within two-four days,' Islam's wife Rita Khanam said. Islam's family is happy that he is home on Eid but Islam said no other Indian should face the ordeal he had been put through. 'I'm saying that an Indian should not be harassed like this and sent to no man's land by their own country like this,' Islam said. 'We are not Bangladeshi. We are swadesi. We have all the documents. They should check this and they should verify this before doing such acts. This is injustice and there will be judgement for this one day.' 'Malik ekojn ase,' Islam said. The Almighty will give us justice.

SC stays trial against former Haryana IAS officer in Manesar land case
SC stays trial against former Haryana IAS officer in Manesar land case

Hindustan Times

time2 hours ago

  • Hindustan Times

SC stays trial against former Haryana IAS officer in Manesar land case

The Supreme Court has stayed trial proceedings against former Haryana IAS officer Rajeev Arora in the Manesar land deal, investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The former IAS officer had petitioned the apex court after his revision petition challenging his summoning by a special CBI court was dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana high court on May 15. A special CBI court had on December 1, 2020 ordered that the former IAS officer be summoned to face trial for committing offence under section 120-B read with 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the Manesar land matter. However, on a revision petition filed by Arora, the Punjab and Haryana high court on December 14, 2020 had stayed the operation and implementation of the order of the special CBI court. Rejecting the challenge to the special CBI court's December 1, 2020 order, the HC on May15 said it found no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by learned special CBI court in summoning the petitioners. An apex court bench headed by chief justice BR Gavai, however, on May 29 ordered that notice be issued to the respondents and 'proceedings qua the petitioner (Rajeev Arora) shall stand stayed till the next date of hearing.' During the trial court proceedings on Friday, Special CBI judge, Rajeev Goyal while referring to the apex court's order of May 29 ordered that proceedings against all the accused persons except Rajeev Arora shall commence. The special court in its June 6 order noted that it is, therefore, seen that all the accused except accused Dhare Singh, Kulwant Singh Lamba, DR Dhingra and Rajeev Arora, have been ordered to be charge-sheeted qua the offences as detailed in the order December 1, 2020. The court said that now arguments need to be advanced on charges in respect of accused Dhare Singh, Kulwant Singh Lamba and DR Dhingra. Learned defence counsels seek time to prepare the arguments. Learned senior public prosecutor Harsh Mohan Singh submits that charge-sheet may kindly be framed against the accused persons who have already been ordered to be charge-sheeted vide order dated December 1,2020. 'I am not able to accept the submission made by the senior public prosecutor as it will not be appropriate to frame charge-sheet before considering the case concerning framing of charges in respect of accused Dhare Singh, Kulwant Singh Lamba and DR Dhingra. In case, the court after hearing contentions of the said accused persons and senior public prosecutor for CBI, concludes that charges are required to be framed against said accused persons as well, then a consolidated charge-sheet qua all the accused persons shall be framed and in my opinion, it will be more appropriate if such a course is adopted, for framing charge-sheet in a piecemeal manner is not desirable. As such, to come up on July 10, 2025 for arguments on charge qua accused Dhare Singh, Kulwant Singh Lamba and DR Dhingra,'' ordered the special court.

HC grants relief to candidates
HC grants relief to candidates

Hans India

time2 hours ago

  • Hans India

HC grants relief to candidates

New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store