Latest news with #AmicusCuriae
New Indian Express
a day ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Orissa HC takes serious note of National Emblem misuse
CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has taken strong cognisance of the rampant misuse and improper representation of the National Emblem of India, following a PIL filed by Ganjam-based NGO, Alone Trust. The PIL, filed on December 27, 2024, was heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice MS Raman. In a detailed order issued on Tuesday, the bench noted that the petition highlighted several instances of violation of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005. The petition contended that misuse of the emblem, including omission of vital elements such as the four animals and the national motto Satyameva Jayate, is becoming widespread, stemming largely from public ignorance. While acknowledging its authority to initiate proceedings against violators, the court emphasised the need for a broader, systemic response. 'The larger issue is required to be addressed so that the misuse of such Act can be prevented and there should be a spreading of awareness into a common citizenry of the state, including the officials while using the State Emblem of India,' the order stated. To aid the court in this effort, two senior advocates Manoj Kumar Mishra, president of the Orissa High Court Bar Association, and Subir Palit were appointed as Amicus Curiae. They have been tasked with assisting the court in addressing both prevention and awareness, ensuring respect for the National Emblem's legal and cultural significance. The bench directed all parties to provide relevant documents and pleadings to the Amicus Curiae within the week. The next hearing has been scheduled for September 2. Represented by advocate Pabitra Kumar Dutta, Alone Trust has also urged the inclusion of the National Emblem in school curriculum and educational campaigns. The PIL argues that widespread ignorance about the emblem's symbolism and legal protections is a key reason for its continued misuse. Adopted on January 26, 1950, the National Emblem is adapted from the Lion Capital of Ashoka at Sarnath, with the words Satyameva Jayate (Truth Alone Triumphs) inscribed below in Devanagari. The petition insists that omissions or alterations undermine its symbolic integrity and the values it represents.
Hindustan Times
7 days ago
- Health
- Hindustan Times
Each district to get half-way homes in phased manner: Himachal govt to HC
The Himachal Pradesh government has told the state high court that it plans to open one half-way home (residential facility for individuals recovering from addiction, mental health issues, or transitioning back into society after incarceration) in each district in a phased manner to address the shortage of facilities for rehabilitated mental health patients. The Himachal Pradesh government has told the state high court that it plans to open one half-way home (residential facility for individuals recovering from addiction, mental health issues, or transitioning back into society after incarceration) in each district in a phased manner to address the shortage of facilities for rehabilitated mental health patients. (Getty Images/iStockphoto/ Representational image) Currently, the state has only two such homes — one for women in Solan and another for men in Mandi — both of which are fully occupied. Together, they provide 25 beds and are run by NGOs with funding from the Social Justice and Empowerment Department. The government shared its plans during a hearing of a suo motu public interest litigation concerning the condition of patients at the Himachal Hospital for Mental Health and Rehabilitation (HHMH) in Boileauganj. The division bench of Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma had taken up the matter after receiving a representation on July 10, 2024, highlighting poor conditions at the facility. According to state data, between 2021 and 2025, HHMH admitted 628 patients, including 137 destitutes. Many were declared fit for discharge by psychiatrists but remained at the hospital because their families either refused to take them back or had voluntarily admitted them in the first place. The government said more half-way homes are essential for long-term community management so that treated patients can be reintegrated into society. The high court, in its August 5, 2025, order, disposed of the PIL while directing the state to comply with the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, which guarantees the right to community living for persons with mental illness. Under Section 19 of the Act, states must ensure such individuals are not forced to remain in institutions due to family rejection and must provide community-based housing options like half-way homes. Amicus Curiae's inputs Amicus Curiae advocate Vishali Lakhanpal told the court that patients were being taken to IGMC, Shimla, for medical tests, and suggested that lab operators visit HHMH instead. The state responded that arrangements are being made for regular on-site testing. She also highlighted the lack of discharge options for destitute patients. The state acknowledged that families are often reluctant to take them back due to the need for continuous medical follow-up and high support requirements. Two female constables are currently posted at HHMH to assist with female patients. The court praised the amicus for her contributions and expressed confidence that the state will fulfil its commitment to expanding half-way homes across Himachal Pradesh.
Time of India
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Acquire land for common burial: HC to Meghalaya
Guwahati: The High Court of Meghalaya has directed the state govt to take immediate steps to acquire the required land for common burial purposes, either by acquisition or private treaty. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court of chief justice IP Mukerji and justice W Diengdoh was hearing a petition filed by 'Re-Seng Khasi Hima Crematorium,' raising the issue of a dearth of crematoria and the lack of willingness of the Khasis and the Jaintias to share a particular crematorium. Initially, the scope of the PIL was confined to facilitating the cremation of persons belonging to Khasi and Jaintia communities on one hand and those embracing the Hindu religion on the other throughout the state. The court, in its order on Monday, stated it carefully examined the detailed report filed by Additional Advocate General K Khan and the report filed by Amicus Curiae N Syngkon. The court also noted that the result of the meetings between the Amicus Curiae and the public authorities appears to be that some Christian denominations, through churches and other religious orders, own private cemeteries. "Those denominations having private cemeteries are reluctant to share their cemeteries with other denominations. They have no objection to sharing cemeteries which are acquired by the govt or public authority and designated for common burial for all communities irrespective of faith," the court said. Stating that the common burial grounds are very few in number compared to the number of dead and the demand for space for their interment, the court said the villages have community land belonging to the village people in common, and a part of it may be gifted for common burial purposes. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "However, substantial land is required across the districts for the above common burial purpose, if any progress is to be made towards solving this problem. These lands need to be acquired by the govt through the land acquisition machinery or through private sale or treaty," the court stated. The court further directed the Amicus Curiae to move the chief secretary of the state to form a committee led by the chief secretary as the chairperson to hold meetings between all stakeholders, including representatives of the district councils, representatives of churches or religious orders, administrative officers, state legal counsel and local functionaries for the purpose of acquisition of land for common burial.
Forbes
07-06-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
18 Research Universities Back Harvard's Lawsuit Against Funding Cuts
Harvard University receives new backing from 18 other institutions in its lawsuit against the Trump ... More administration's freezing of federal funds. A group of the nation's leading research universities have requested that a federal judge allow them to file a legal brief supporting Harvard University's lawsuit against the Trump administration over more than $2 billion in frozen federal grant money. The 18 institutions requesting permission to file an amicus curiae (or 'friend of the court') brief are: Boston University; Brown University; California Institute of Technology; Colorado State University; Dartmouth College; Johns Hopkins University; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan State University; Oregon State University; Princeton University; Rice University; Rutgers University; Tufts University; University of Maryland, College Park; University of Oregon; University of Pennsylvania; University of Pittsburgh; and Yale University. The request was granted on Friday by Judge Allison D. Burroughs, who is presiding over the federal lawsuit. The schools have not yet filed the brief, but in their request they state that each of them 'has received millions of dollars in federal investments in scientific research over the decades.' The universities claim that 'the federal funding terminations challenged in this lawsuit inflict grievous harm that extends well beyond Harvard University,' arguing that academic research is an interconnected enterprise. The elimination of funding at Harvard negatively impacts the entire ecosystem. The cuts will disrupt ongoing research, ruin experiments and datasets, destroy the careers of aspiring scientists, and deter long-term investments at universities across the country." Harvard filed its lawsuit against the Trump administration on April 21, contending that the government's suspension of its research funding was 'unlawful.' The freeze on approximately $2.2 billion in federal funds came after Harvard University had forcefully rejected an April letter in which the administration listed a set of sweeping demands that Trump officials said Harvard had to meet if it wanted to maintain financial funding from the federal government. The administration has criticized Harvard's response to student protests over the war in Gaza, accusing it of failing to adequately confront campus antisemitism and harassment, and it accused the university of using discriminatory admission practices. But Harvard drew a line in the sand when Harvard President Alan Garber wrote a letter to the campus community stating that the institution had "informed the administration through our legal counsel that we will not accept their proposed agreement. The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' Instead, Harvard filed its lawsuit. That letter set up what many higher education leaders had been calling for — a high-profile, principled stand against what they believe is the illegitimate attempt by the federal government to control how private universities conduct their business. While Harvard has been the leader of this resistance, the request by both public and private universities to file the amicus brief shows a new willingness of more institutions to join the fray. Noteworthy is that all but two of Harvard's Ivy League peers — Cornell University and Columbia University — were included in the group of petitioners. The action is significant because it broadens the issues in dispute beyond just an increasingly acrimonious fight between Trump officials and the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. Indeed, as the universities contend, the federal government's actions against Harvard undermines the 'longstanding mutually beneficial partnership between the government and academia that has powered American innovation and ensured American leadership for over eighty years.'
Hindustan Times
15-05-2025
- Health
- Hindustan Times
Himachal HC pulls up state govt over drug menace
In wake of the increasing drug menace Himachal Pradesh high court has pulled up state government for dragging its feet on notifying 'State Policy on Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts'. 'The state shall also inform this court whether the draft of 'State Policy on Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts', which was under consideration at the government level as per the affidavit of the chief secretary on April 20, 2019, has been notified or not?,' said the division bench comprising of chief justice GS Sandhawalia and justice Ranjan Sharma in its May 13 order during resumed hearing of petition on drug menace in state. The high court, as part of a slew of directives, has asked the state government to consider penalising the panchayats that fail to report cannabis cultivation and reward the panchayats that play a proactive role in curbing such cases. Referring to the suggestions of Amicus Curiae, high court has called for active participation of officials of revenue forest and panchayats to check illegal cannabis cultivation. '...involvement of field staff of the revenue and forest departments and panchayat of the concerned villages, has been suggested by casting a primary duty upon them to report any illicit cultivation and on failure on their part, the benefits and schemes made available to the panchayats may be stopped. The officials/staff that takes prompt and effective action to prevent illicit cultivation should be suitably rewarded and similarly incentives should be given to the Panchayats also,' said the order issued on May 13. High court has also directed the state government to submit an affidavit of district-wise NDPS cases registered for the last five years to demonstrate whether the drug menace is decreasing or increasing. High court has also sought a composite affidavit from the state regarding facilities of de-addiction and treatment centres at the district level, along with details of number of rooms which are available and the doctors, as well as supporting staff for the said purpose.
