Latest news with #B.R.Gavai
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Constitution should be credited for keeping country united during crises: CJI Gavai
Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai on Saturday (May 31, 2025) said that whenever the country has faced a crisis, it has remained united and strong, and that the Constitution should be credited for this. The CJI was addressing a function after the inauguration of advocate chambers and a multi-level parking at the Allahabad High Court. 'When the Constitution was being made and its final draft was presented before the Constituent Assembly, at that time some people used to say that the Constitution is too federal, while some used to say that it is too unitary. Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar had replied that the Constitution is neither wholly federal nor wholly unitary. But one thing I can tell you is that we have given a Constitution which will keep India united and strong both in times of peace and war,' CJI Gavai said. He said India has been on the path of development after independence due to the Constitution. 'Today we see what is the condition of our neighbouring countries. And India is making a journey towards development after independence. Whenever there has been a crisis in the country, it has remained united and strong. The credit for this should be given to the Constitution,' he said. 'It is our fundamental duty to reach out to the last citizen of this country who needs justice. Be it the legislature, the executive or the judiciary, everyone has to reach out to that citizen,' the CJI told the gathering.
United News of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- United News of India
SC issues notice on private schools on govt land hiking fees
New Delhi, May 30 (UNI) The Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Director of Education (DoE), Government of Delhi, on a plea challenging the Delhi High Court's orders that permitted private unaided schools situated on government-allotted land to hike fees without prior approval from the education department. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih, was hearing a special leave petition filed by Naya Samaj Parents Association, contesting two rulings of the Delhi High Court that upheld the autonomy of private schools in revising fee structures. According to the petition, 'private unaided schools in Delhi have increased their fees multifold, in some cases by up to 100% and are initiating penal actions against students for non-payment, thereby creating confusion and panic among parents.' The controversy stems from an interim order passed in April 2024 by a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court in a writ petition filed by the Action Committee Unaided Recognised Private Schools. In this order, the court observed that, as per prevailing law, unaided recognised private schools are not required to seek prior permission from the DoE before raising their fees, regardless of land allotment clauses. The order also stayed a circular issued by the DoE regulating fee proposals from unaided private schools. The petition before the Supreme Court specifically challenges paragraph 29 of this order. Subsequently, in its final order dated April 8, 2025, the High Court's division bench dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal filed against the interim order, on the procedural ground that the petitioner was not a party in the original writ proceedings. The petitioner, however, argues that this decision conflicts with previous rulings of both the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court. It cites the Justice For All vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi case, where the Delhi High Court held that the DoE has the authority under Section 17(3) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 to regulate fee hikes and prevent profiteering by unaided schools. The petitioner also relies on the Supreme Court's judgment in the landmark Modern School vs Union of India case, which emphasised that private schools on DDA-allotted land must seek prior approval from the DoE before increasing tuition fees. In that case, the Apex Court directed the Director of Education to verify whether schools were complying with the terms of their land allotment and take action in case of violations. A specific clause in the DDA's allotment letters, referred to by the Supreme Court, reads, 'The school shall not increase the rates of tuition fee without the prior sanction of the Directorate of Education, Delhi Administration and shall follow the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act/Rules, 1973 and other instructions issued from time to time.' In its ruling in Modern School, the Court had directed, 'The Director of Education shall examine the terms of allotment issued to schools and ensure compliance within three months. In case of non-compliance, appropriate steps shall be taken.' The Supreme Court has now taken cognisance of the petitioner's concerns and issued a notice to the Delhi DoE for its response. The matter is expected to be heard in June. UNI SNG SSP
The Wire
3 days ago
- Business
- The Wire
‘In Public Interest': MMRDA Tells SC as it Scraps Tender for Mumbai Elevated Road, Tunnel Projects
Menu हिंदी తెలుగు اردو Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion Support independent journalism. Donate Now Government 'In Public Interest': MMRDA Tells SC as it Scraps Tender for Mumbai Elevated Road, Tunnel Projects The Wire Staff 44 minutes ago CJI B.R. Gavai welcomed the decision and said, 'We are in the era of transparency. We should appreciate SG Mehta and Mr Rohatgi.' View of the Supreme Court of India, in New Delhi. Photo: PTI. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute now New Delhi: The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) has decided to scrap the tender process for the construction of Thane-Ghodbunder to Bhayandar tunnel and elevated road projects in 'public interest', it informed the Supreme Court on Friday (May 30). A bench of Chief Justie of India B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih, along with newly-sworn in Justice Atul Chandurkar, was hearing the plea filed by Larsen & Toubro (L&T) accusing MMRDA of certain irregularities in the tender process for the projects collectively worth Rs 14,000 crore. 'We are scrapping the tender. Scrapped,' said senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the MMRDA. The CJI, welcoming the decision, emphasised transparency. 'We are in the era of transparency. We should appreciate SG Mehta and Mr Rohatgi,' Chief Justice Gavai said. 'It is fairly stated that the entire render process is scrapped in larger public interest. Thus the plea is disposed off as infructuous,' the court concluded, closing L&T's plea. The 5-km-long twin tunnel project connecting Thane-Ghodbunder and Bhayandar is estimated at Rs 8,000 crore, while the elevated road projects, a 9.8-km elevated creek road bridge, to connect Bhayandar with Ghodbunder Road in Thane, is estimated to cost Rs 6,000 crore. Both the projects are part of the extension of Mumbai Coastal Road project. Larsen & Toubro (L&T) Ltd alleged procedural lapses and unfair treatment in the bidding for the Thane-Ghodbunder to Bhayandar infrastructure project. The company contested its 'technical' disqualification from the bidding for the two projects, where Hyderabad-based Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd (MEIL) emerged as the lowest (L1) bidder, even though its bid was reportedly at a substantially higher project cost compared to L&T's. The top court had started hearing the petition on May 26 and issued a stern directive to the MMRDA, suggesting it re-tender the two infrastructure projects, or face a stay on the current process. 'The very name of the bidder, it's difficult to believe, he has been chosen to construct the Central Vista by the Central government,' CJI Gavai had remarked, highlighting L&T's established credentials. 'Take instructions on whether you are willing to re-tender. Otherwise we will stay,' the CJI told solicitor general Tushar Mehta and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the MMRDA. In Thursday's hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for L&T, had highlighted that the company selected for the project lacked credentials and stressed that the process for selection was opaque. Notably, the Hyderabad-based Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd (MEIL), valued at Rs 67,500 crore, has been a prominent purchaser of electoral bonds. Make a contribution to Independent Journalism Related News The Redevelopment of Dharavi will Destroy the Livelihoods of Those Who Work in Small Businesses Mumbai Floods: Aaditya Thackeray, Varsha Gaikwad Slam BJP-BMC Over Civic Collapse Heavy Rains Lash Mumbai, Administration Issues Red Alert, Urges Citizens to Stay Indoors Yellow, Black, Blue: How Residents of Mumbai's Govandi Struggle with Dirty Water and an Apathetic BMC The Thousands of Wells of Mumbai Serve its People, Birds and Animals 'Completed' on Paper, But Missing in Key Border Areas: J&K Authorities Probe Centre-Funded Bunker Project 'We Will Die For Our Lands': Villagers in Arunachal's Siang District Protest Against Mega Dam Plan After Tahawwur Rana's Extradition, Govt Appoints Team of Prosecutors to Conduct 26/11 Trial How Amaravati Has Gone From Grand Blueprint to Ghost Town – and Back View in Desktop Mode About Us Contact Us Support Us © Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
United News of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- United News of India
SC initiates Suo Motu contempt case against journalist Ajay Shukla over alleged scandalous remarks
New Delhi, May 29 (UNI) The Supreme Court has initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Chandigarh-based journalist and YouTuber Ajay Shukla for allegedly making scandalous remarks against a Supreme Court judge. The case, titled "In Re: Scandalous Remarks Made by Mr. Ajay Shukla, Editor-in-Chief, Varprad Media Pvt. Ltd., a Digital Channel", has been listed for hearing on Friday before a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, Justice Augustine George Masih, and one more judge who is yet to be nominated. This marks the first suo motu criminal contempt case taken up by the Apex Court in 2025. Although the exact content triggering the contempt proceedings has not been officially disclosed, a review of Shukla's recent uploads on his YouTube channel suggests the controversy may be linked to a video posted around the retirement of Justice Bela M. Trivedi. The video's caption reportedly referred to her as a 'Godi judge', a derogatory term implying bias in favour of the central government. Further developments are expected following the listing of the case later this week. UNI SNG RN
United News of India
5 days ago
- Politics
- United News of India
SC refers Karnataka Govt's plea on Bangalore Palace TDR dispute to CJI
New Delhi, May 27 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday referred to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice B. R. Gavai the Karnataka government's application challenging a direction for the issuance of Transferable Development Rights (TDR) certificates to the heirs of the erstwhile Mysuru royal family. CJI Gavai would now study the matter and could give appropriate orders on the constitution of a larger bench to hear the matter. The direction for placing the matter before the CJI came from a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta, which expressed reservations about sitting in appeal over an order passed by a coordinate bench of the Supreme Court. The matter arose out of a May 22 order passed by a bench of Justices M. M. Sundresh and Aravind Kumar, which, while hearing a batch of contempt petitions, directed the Karnataka government to release TDR certificates in respect of 15 acres of Bangalore Palace Grounds acquired by the state, valued at over Rs 3,000 crore in favour of the legal heirs of the Mysuru royal family. In response, the Karnataka government moved an application in the apex court in a connected civil appeal challenging the direction. Appearing for the state, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the May 22 order was issued in a contempt matter, while the present application was filed in an appeal that has been pending since 1997. Justice Surya Kant observed during the hearing, 'How can we sit in appeal over an order passed by a coordinate Bench?' In support, Sibal submitted, 'This order has been passed in a contempt petition, but we are before the court in a connected appeal.' The bench noted that appropriate orders, including on whether the matter should be heard by a larger bench, must be sought from the Chief Justice of India. Accordingly, the matter was directed to be placed before CJI Gavai on the administrative side. The underlying dispute has its roots in 1996, when the Karnataka government enacted the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, seeking to acquire the Palace Grounds. The Act was upheld by the Karnataka High Court, which was subsequently challenged by the heirs of the royal family in a civil appeal before the Supreme Court in 1997, which remains pending. On Monday, the application was mentioned before a bench led by CJI B. R. Gavai, which agreed to list the matter today and remarked on the procedural question whether one bench could effectively review the order of another coordinate bench. Arguing against the retrospective grant of TDR, Sibal stated, 'TDR was permitted only after a 2004 amendment. It cannot be applied retrospectively.' On the other side, counsel for the claimants submitted that the matter had already become infructuous, asserting that the TDR certificates had already been issued in compliance with the earlier direction. The issue now awaits further consideration by a larger bench, subject to orders by the Chief Justice of India. UNI SNG SSP
