Kerala HC recommends govt pleader's promotion
The HC made the recommendation to promote Parvathy as the senior government pleader while it was considering a petition filed by the wife of an educational officer and their daughter seeking to disburse Death-Cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) to them.
In the interim order issued on June 11, Justice D K Singh said, 'Parvathy Kottol, the government pleader, who may be designated as senior government pleader as she has completed more than 12 years of practice, and the government has not yet designated her as senior government pleader, for which the necessary decision is to be taken by the government.'
The petition was filed on March 22, and in the last hearing, which was on June 11, Parvathy had sought time to file an objection to the petition.
The court granted three weeks and made the recommendation. The petitioner had sought a directive to the deputy director of general education, Alappuzha, to issue the non-liability certificate (NLC) of the petitioners to the treasury officer so as to release the DCRG due to them.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘Irreplaceable loss': Govt, SSC bat for ‘tainted' teachers, argue against barring them from fresh hiring
The West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) on Wednesday appealed in the Calcutta High Court arguing that candidates identified as ineligible have already faced punishment and if they are barred from participating in the application process, it would cause them irreplaceable loss. The Calcutta High Court on Monday had ordered the WBSSC to rectify its latest notification for the recruitment of over 35,000 school staff, directing it to bar 'identified tainted' candidates of the 2016 selection process from applying this year. It had also directed that if any tainted candidate had applied in order to offer his or her candidature under the recruitment notification, the application would stand cancelled. During the hearing, in front of the division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Smita Das De, senior counsel Kalyan Banerjee, appearing for SSC, submitted, 'After the delivery of the Supreme Court (SC) judgement on April 3, the service of both the tainted and untainted were terminated. Then after the April 17 modification, the untainted were allowed to remain in service till December 31. Even the SC judgement does not say that tainted candidates will not be allowed to participate. SC gave age relaxation for the untainted candidates and the physically handicapped candidates.' According to Banerjee, the SSC had submitted a report based on the CBI investigation into rank jumping and OMR issues, and the Supreme Court had directed tainted candidates to refund their salaries. Banerjee stated that in the fresh selection process, age relaxation is provided to untainted and disabled candidates only. However, tainted and unsuccessful candidates were not barred from participating in the examination. Following this, the Division Bench observed, 'But the persons with so much of fraud, so much of misdemeanour, misconduct will be permitted.' Banerjee said that denying them participation would amount to double punishment and submitted, 'Penalty was imposed on them for committing the offence, they were asked to pay back their salary and their jobs taken away. Now the question arises, will they get double punishment and punishment for life. Doesn't it violate the Constitution? No criminal charges have been proved against these 'tainted' candidates, stringent punishment has been imposed on them. If they are not allowed to participate it will be double punishment.' Questioning the Commission's locus in arguing this point, Justice Soumen Sen said, 'What locus has the commission have to argue this point? The person aggrieved must make such appeal. Commission is not the person aggrieved.' 'It is the legislative power of the state to secure the public interest. I have received the application for all. The state's authority is to provide for all. CBI will run an investigation for 7, 10,12 years and in that time the public rights will be affected,' Banerjee submitted. According to the SSC, filing the application does not guarantee appointment, and even if they are appointed they can be dismissed if convicted. While 2.6 lakh applications have been received, only 188 tainted candidates have applied, the SSC said. Meanwhile, the Advocate General for the State, Kishore Dutta said, that 'The SC has given the harshest of punishment, but was careful enough not to debar them from future employment. Fundamental rights cannot be curtailed. Can fundamental rights be taken away?' According to the Court, since the tainted candidates were asked to return their salaries, that experience cannot be counted: 'They have been asked to return their salaries that means that we cannot say that is part of qualifying service. A person who is beneficiary of fraud that period of service cannot be taken as qualifying service. Qualifying service has various factors when complicity is established then this cannot be treated as qualifying service.' According to the Advocate General, 'Whatever SC wanted to take it has been taken away. If SC wanted to deprive the tainted candidate of their service then they would have said it.' The court will hear the matter on Thursday. In April, the SC had cancelled the appointment of nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff in state-run and-aided institutions after finding that the selection process was tainted.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
2020 Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case: Order on bail pleas of Umar Khalid, 7 others reserved
Two benches of the Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved orders on bail pleas of eight accused in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, even as the Delhi Police argued that 'if you are doing something against the nation, you better be in jail till you are acquitted or convicted'. A bench of Justices Naveen Chawla and Shalinder Kaur reserved the bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa ur Rehman, Athar Khan and Khalid Saifi while another bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar reserved the bail plea of Tasleem Ahmed. The bench of Justices Chawla and Kaur will hear Shadab Ahmad's bail plea on Thursday. Notably, Saifi, Fatima, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shifa ur Rehman had completed arguments for bail twice earlier before two HC benches. However, the judges, after being appointed as Chief Justices of other HCs, did not deliver their verdict. This comes a day after a HC bench had orally remarked, 'for how long can a person be kept in jail', while hearing a plea by Tasleem Ahmed, who was arrested by the Delhi Police Special Cell in June 2020 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The HC had noted that 'five years have gone by', and yet the arguments on the charge remain to be completed. Further, CJI B R Gavai, delivering a lecture on July 6, had said, 'In the recent past, this principle (of bail is the rule and jail is the exception) was somewhat forgotten. I am happy to state that I had the opportunity in the last year, 2024, to reiterate this legal principle in the cases of Prabir Purkayastha, Manish Sisodia, and Kavita vs ED.' On Wednesday, arguing against the bail pleas, the Delhi Police – represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta – told the bench of Justices Chawla and Kaur: 'Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were preparing to divide the nation, cutting the nation on the basis of religion… They are all acting in concert, Gufisha, Umar, everyone – they are in touch with each other by the WhatsApp group and conspiracy is taking place…' 'In cases involving anti-national activities, long incarceration is not a factor. This is an attack on the sovereignty of the country. By attacking the National Capital, it would have an effect on the entire country. If you are doing something against the nation, you better be in jail till you are acquitted or convicted… Long incarceration is certainly a ground (for bail) but not in such matters where you are ensuring that the country bleeds violence and wanting to break the country in two parts.' Mehta further said, 'I want to show what the intellectuals are doing, dividing the nation on religious lines. Imam had delivered a speech indicating a four-week timeline for executing (the conspiracy)… They (petitioners) showed a narrative that intellectual are in jail. Their intention was to divide the nation on religious lines. This is not a spontaneous riot… The intention was to cause national embarrassment at global level. 24 February 2020 was the day of US President visit… There was clear unambiguous intention of putting entire nation to shame by doing something in the National Capital…' The police probe in the case was 'one of the finest investigations' which had been carried out, he added. The accused are facing allegations of pre-planned conspiracy to allegedly cause riots in East Delhi between February 23, 2020 and February 25, 2020.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Barring ‘tainted' candidates amounts to double jeopardy: SSC to HC
Kolkata: State school service commission (SSC) and Bengal govt on Wednesday argued against Calcutta High Court's single bench order barring 1,801 "tainted" candidates from participating in the fresh recruitment process. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now SSC told a division bench that these candidates could not be subjected to "double jeopardy". The last date for applications is July 14. SSC's lawyer and senior MP Kalyan Banerjee argued in the division bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Smita Das De that once Supreme Court scrapped the 2016 selection panel, there remained no reason to separate the tainted from the untainted. Unconvinced by the argument, Justice Sen said: "Are you (SSC) in a position to argue for the tainted candidates? How are you even affected by it?" Banerjee said: "There cannot be two punishments for the same crime. The apex court set aside the entire panel. By this line of argument, even those students who were taught by these tainted candidates have to be barred from school." Justice Sen responded: "You basically want to say that even though they were undeserving to be teachers, the fact that they taught for around a decade in schools, their experience makes them eligible. Is this what you are trying to argue?" Banerjee said yes, adding: "We want the 1,801 tainted teachers to be allowed to participate." Appearing for the state, advocate general Kishore Datta argued: "The right to employment under Article 16 is also the right to apply (for the job). Whatever the court order, let it not take away a person's right to livelihood." HC will hear the case again on Thursday. 'Untainted OBC' teachers move HC: "Untainted" teachers, who belonged to OBC categories A and B, later struck down by Calcutta High Court's division bench, approached HC as they are unable to participate in the new recruitment process. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Approximately 2,500 teachers, who lost their jobs in 2016, are unable to be part of the fresh recruitment process for classes 9-10 and 11-12. These teachers have been excluded from the state's new OBC list, which is post-2010. In 2016, during recruitment, the qualification at the graduate level ranged from 45%-49%, but according to the new recruitment rules, the requirement is 50%. The matter will be heard on Thursday by Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya. Kolkata: State school service commission (SSC) and Bengal govt on Wednesday argued against Calcutta High Court's single bench order barring 1,801 "tainted" candidates from participating in the fresh recruitment process. SSC told a division bench that these candidates could not be subjected to "double jeopardy". The last date for applications is July 14. SSC's lawyer and senior MP Kalyan Banerjee argued in the division bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Smita Das De that once Supreme Court scrapped the 2016 selection panel, there remained no reason to separate the tainted from the untainted. Unconvinced by the argument, Justice Sen said: "Are you (SSC) in a position to argue for the tainted candidates? How are you even affected by it?" Banerjee said: "There cannot be two punishments for the same crime. The apex court set aside the entire panel. By this line of argument, even those students who were taught by these tainted candidates have to be barred from school." Justice Sen responded: "You basically want to say that even though they were undeserving to be teachers, the fact that they taught for around a decade in schools, their experience makes them eligible. Is this what you are trying to argue?" Banerjee said yes, adding: "We want the 1,801 tainted teachers to be allowed to participate." Appearing for the state, advocate general Kishore Datta argued: "The right to employment under Article 16 is also the right to apply (for the job). Whatever the court order, let it not take away a person's right to livelihood." HC will hear the case again on Thursday. 'Untainted OBC' teachers move HC: "Untainted" teachers, who belonged to OBC categories A and B, later struck down by Calcutta High Court's division bench, approached HC as they are unable to participate in the new recruitment process. Approximately 2,500 teachers, who lost their jobs in 2016, are unable to be part of the fresh recruitment process for classes 9-10 and 11-12. These teachers have been excluded from the state's new OBC list, which is post-2010. In 2016, during recruitment, the qualification at the graduate level ranged from 45%-49%, but according to the new recruitment rules, the requirement is 50%. The matter will be heard on Thursday by Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya.
