Latest news with #MakarandKarnik
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
HC stays new rule for FYJC quotas in minority colleges
Mumbai: Bombay HC Thursday stayed a clause in the May 6 GR that introduced reservations for SC/ST/OBC/SEBC for FYJC admissions in minority institutions in the state. "Till further orders, we direct that insofar as minority institutions are concerned for admissions to FYJC, the mandate of social reservation shall not be made applicable… Consequent steps may be taken by state govt," said Justices Makarand Karnik & Nitin Borkar. They directed the govt to file its reply in 4 weeks and posted the hearing for Aug 6. On Wednesday, the judges had asked state to consider withdrawing the clause and issue a corrigendum. Clause 11 of the GR mentions that social and parallel reservations will apply to vacancies after filling minority seats in minority institutions. However, as govt pleader Neha Bhide said Thursday there are no instructions to withdraw the clause, the HC heard the matter on merits for grant of interim reliefs. The judges heard two petitions challenging the contentious clause of the GR by which govt brought minority institutions under the purview of social reservations. The first petition was filed by Solapur's Shri APD Jain Pathashala, a trust that runs Walchand College of Arts and Science and Hirachand Nemchand College of Commerce. The second was a joint petition by south Mumbai colleges, including St Xavier's, KC, HR, Jai Hind and Maharashtra College, along with Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institutions. Senior advocate Milind Sathe, for the Mumbai colleges, and advocate S C Naidu, for the Solapur colleges, relied on Articles 15 (5) and 30 of the Constitution emphasising on the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutes. They also brought to HC's notice clause 18.9 of the GR that makes social reservations generally applicable to FYJC admissions in all colleges. They cited decisions — including HC's 2017 verdict in the St Xavier's College case — that minority educational institutions, both aided and unaided, are exempt from backward class reservations. In July 2018, Supreme Court upheld the HC verdict. "We are saying, insofar as minority institutions in all seats, there is no cannot be imposed by govt," argued Sathe. Govt pleader Neha Bhide countered that the May 6 GR does not interfere with the rights of minority institutions; they have the right to fill 50% of their seats. It is only when seats remain unfilled and have been surrendered, that the policy is being made applicable to these seats, she said, adding: "Social reservation is an obligation put on state for filling up seats. " The judges "prima facie" found substance in the submissions of the petitioners' advocates' and granted interim relief. Follow more information on Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here . Get real-time live updates on rescue operations and check full list of passengers onboard AI 171 .
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
HC to state: Justify SC/ST/OBC quotas in minority institutions
Mumbai: Bombay high court on Tuesday questioned state govt on what basis had it issued the govt resolution (GR) including SC, ST and OBC reservations for FYJC admission in minority institutions in the state. "Justify your stand," said Justices Makarand Karnik and Nitin Borkar and posted the hearing on Wednesday. They heard a petition by Solapur's APD Jain Pathashala, a trust that runs Walchand College of Arts and Science and Hirachand Nemchand College of Commerce, filed through advocate Sandeep Waghmare, challenging the May 6 GR issued by the school education and sports department applying constitutional/social reservations in minority education institutes. Even as HC began hearing this case, colleges such as St Xavier's, Jai Hind, HR, KC and Maharashtra College that filed a joint petition with the Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institution against the GR, sought a hearing too. All matters will be heard on Wednesday. Advocate S C Naidu, for the Solapur colleges, argued that Article 15 (5) of the Indian Constitution excludes minority educational institutions, aided or unaided, from applicability of reservations for socially and educationally backward classes. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo He said that under Article 30 (1) (Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions), the right of admission is exclusively with the management of the minority institution. Naidu also questioned the timing of implementation of the reservations. "This they do at the last minute," he said, adding that it disturbs the admission procedure. Naidu said an identical GR was issued on March 7, 2019, by state govt and was "simply" withdrawn after petitions were filed in HC. "They are playing not only with colleges, but also with students ...Students have to go through stress for studies, for exams and now this stress of uncertainty in admission," Naidu added. The judges then asked the state's advocate to take instruction and inform. Naidu said the finalisation of the merit list is scheduled for Wednesday. The judges then directed that it will be subject to the outcome of the petition. The petition, filed by Maharashtra Association of Minority Institutions and Mumbai colleges, through advocate Manorama Mohanty, said being minority educational institutions, they are governed by an indefeasible right guaranteed under Article 30 to establish, administer and manage educational institutions of their own choice. Further, this right has been acknowledged and reiterated in a series of judgments of Supreme Court as well as Bombay HC "which have consistently held that the minority educational institutions are not subject to any social reservations". The petitioners urged HC to quash and set aside the contentious portion of the May 6 GR and to stay it pending hearing. They also sought directions to state govt to update/rectify the in-house and management quotas and to follow the seat distribution matrix used in 2024-25 academic year. This year, the seat distribution matrix has reduced the management and in-house quota share to half. Mumbai: Bombay high court on Tuesday questioned state govt on what basis had it issued the govt resolution (GR) including SC, ST and OBC reservations for FYJC admission in minority institutions in the state. "Justify your stand," said Justices Makarand Karnik and Nitin Borkar and posted the hearing on Wednesday. They heard a petition by Solapur's APD Jain Pathashala, a trust that runs Walchand College of Arts and Science and Hirachand Nemchand College of Commerce, filed through advocate Sandeep Waghmare, challenging the May 6 GR issued by the school education and sports department applying constitutional/social reservations in minority education institutes. Even as HC began hearing this case, colleges such as St Xavier's, Jai Hind, HR, KC and Maharashtra College that filed a joint petition with the Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institution against the GR, sought a hearing too. All matters will be heard on Wednesday. Advocate S C Naidu, for the Solapur colleges, argued that Article 15 (5) of the Indian Constitution excludes minority educational institutions, aided or unaided, from applicability of reservations for socially and educationally backward classes. He said that under Article 30 (1) (Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions), the right of admission is exclusively with the management of the minority institution. Naidu also questioned the timing of implementation of the reservations. "This they do at the last minute," he said, adding that it disturbs the admission procedure. Naidu said an identical GR was issued on March 7, 2019, by state govt and was "simply" withdrawn after petitions were filed in HC. "They are playing not only with colleges, but also with students ...Students have to go through stress for studies, for exams and now this stress of uncertainty in admission," Naidu added. The judges then asked the state's advocate to take instruction and inform. Naidu said the finalisation of the merit list is scheduled for Wednesday. The judges then directed that it will be subject to the outcome of the petition. The petition, filed by Maharashtra Association of Minority Institutions and Mumbai colleges, through advocate Manorama Mohanty, said being minority educational institutions, they are governed by an indefeasible right guaranteed under Article 30 to establish, administer and manage educational institutions of their own choice. Further, this right has been acknowledged and reiterated in a series of judgments of Supreme Court as well as Bombay HC "which have consistently held that the minority educational institutions are not subject to any social reservations". The petitioners urged HC to quash and set aside the contentious portion of the May 6 GR and to stay it pending hearing. They also sought directions to state govt to update/rectify the in-house and management quotas and to follow the seat distribution matrix used in 2024-25 academic year. This year, the seat distribution matrix has reduced the management and in-house quota share to half.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Give ‘one chance' to two students who tampered with marks: HC to NMIMS
Mumbai: Bombay High Court on Tuesday asked Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies (NMIMS) to consider giving "one chance" to two first-year students whose admissions were cancelled for tampering with the marks of a mid-term exam paper. "What has happened, has happened. It shouldn't have happened... Consider from a reformative aspect," said Justices Makarand Karnik and Nitin Borkar. The students, aged 23 and 25, hailing from Haryana and Delhi, were enrolled with NMIMS's School of Business Management for 2024-26 integrated MBA course with six semesters. The second semester exams were held in Jan. In March, the answer sheets of the corporate finance paper were distributed to verify the assessment. The petitioners and another student tampered with the marks "to depict that they had received a high score". On March 20 they were asked to remain present. They tendered handwritten apologies. On March 24 they were barred from appearing for the third semester exams on March 25 and informed by email that their admissions were cancelled for the entire year. "The action taken was impulsive, spur of the moment decision motivated by the dwindling prospects of securing a good job and societal pressure to perform well at all times," the petitions stated, adding in any event it would not affect their passing the present academic year. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like One of the Most Successful Investors of All Time, Warren Buffett, Recommends: 5 Books for Turning... Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Click Here Undo They are ineligible for promotion to the second year and are required to restart the entire course again. Senior advocate Ashish Kamat for NMIMS said one student who scored 8.5 out of 30 marks had added 1 before it and returned the paper. He said it was not impulsive behaviour and that the three students acted in concert. "As a college, I am obliged to maintain standards. These are future auditors and CAs of this country... If this is to be condoned, then is this not cheating?" he asked. Advocates Aneesa Cheema and Arshil Shah said their clients admit to interpolation of marks. Also, they have an impeccable record of academic achievements and urged that they be allowed to appear for the third semester re-exam beginning Wednesday. The judges said the petitioners have learnt a lesson and have been through trauma since March. They do not find any fault in the college's action. "Otherwise they are good students. Can you not talk to your management?" Justice Karnik asked Kamat. The matter will be heard Wednesday.
Time of India
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Find out if IIT-B land has been encroached upon: HC to collector
Mumbai: Bombay High Court has ordered the collector (suburbs) to carry out a survey to ascertain if land belonging to IIT Bombay at Powai, Andheri East, has been encroached upon. Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand Karnik on Wednesday directed that in case encroachment is found on the land belonging to IIT-B, "the collector shall initiate action for removal of encroachment in accordance with law".The order was passed on a public interest litigation by activist Shabbir Shaikh, seeking the removal of unauthorised and illegal constructions on govt land made by three persons. His petition stated it was an open plot where children played, "but it is now occupied by the respondents". Shaikh made several complaints on IIT-B and BMC portals and at Powai police station, but to date, no action was taken, and the respondents "and their henchmen are continuing with the unauthorised construction work". Shaikh was also allegedly threatened with dire consequences if he raised any advocate, Laxman Kalel, said despite complaints made to the higher authorities about the constructions by the respondents, no action was taken to remove the encroachment. The respondent's advocate disputed the submission and denied his clients encroached upon IIT-B judges, in their order, said, "Undoubtedly, no individual has a right to encroach on anybody's land". Operation Sindoor Operation Sindoor: Several airports in India closed - check full list Did Pak shoot down Indian jets? What MEA said India foils Pakistan's attack on Jammu airport: What we know so far However, whether or not the respondents encroached on the land belonging to IIT-B "is a question of fact, which is disputed, which cannot be determined in summary proceedings" before the high they directed the collector to issue a notice to the petitioner, the chief executive officer of IIT-B, as well as the respondents, for carrying out the survey in their presence "to ascertain the encroachment on the subject land". The collector was directed to give the parties an opportunity for a hearing and to submit documents in support of their claim. Any person aggrieved by the collector's order will be at liberty to take recourse to remedy available in law, they judges also recorded govt pleader Neha Bhide's undertaking that assistance of police will be provided to the collector "for removal of the encroachment from the subject land, if found to be the land of IIT-Bombay". They disposed of the PIL, directing that the "entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from today". Mumbai: Bombay High Court has ordered the collector (suburbs) to carry out a survey to ascertain if land belonging to IIT Bombay at Powai, Andheri East, has been encroached upon. Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand Karnik on Wednesday directed that in case encroachment is found on the land belonging to IIT-B, "the collector shall initiate action for removal of encroachment in accordance with law".The order was passed on a public interest litigation by activist Shabbir Shaikh, seeking the removal of unauthorised and illegal constructions on govt land made by three persons. His petition stated it was an open plot where children played, "but it is now occupied by the respondents". Shaikh made several complaints on IIT-B and BMC portals and at Powai police station, but to date, no action was taken, and the respondents "and their henchmen are continuing with the unauthorised construction work". Shaikh was also allegedly threatened with dire consequences if he raised any advocate, Laxman Kalel, said despite complaints made to the higher authorities about the constructions by the respondents, no action was taken to remove the encroachment. The respondent's advocate disputed the submission and denied his clients encroached upon IIT-B judges, in their order, said, "Undoubtedly, no individual has a right to encroach on anybody's land". However, whether or not the respondents encroached on the land belonging to IIT-B "is a question of fact, which is disputed, which cannot be determined in summary proceedings" before the high they directed the collector to issue a notice to the petitioner, the chief executive officer of IIT-B, as well as the respondents, for carrying out the survey in their presence "to ascertain the encroachment on the subject land". The collector was directed to give the parties an opportunity for a hearing and to submit documents in support of their claim. Any person aggrieved by the collector's order will be at liberty to take recourse to remedy available in law, they judges also recorded govt pleader Neha Bhide's undertaking that assistance of police will be provided to the collector "for removal of the encroachment from the subject land, if found to be the land of IIT-Bombay". They disposed of the PIL, directing that the "entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from today".
Time of India
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
HC seeks CPCB's reply to PoP immersion plan
Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Monday sought the Central Pollution Control Board 's reply on a committee's recommendations on the immersion of plaster of Paris (PoP) idols. Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand Karnik were hearing petitions by associations of idol-makers challenging a clause in the CPCB's May 12, 2020 guidelines that bans the immersion of PoP idols. They were seeking relief for the Ganesh festival which will be held in August. You Can Also Check: Mumbai AQI | Weather in Mumbai | Bank Holidays in Mumbai | Public Holidays in Mumbai Advocate Uday Warunjikar, for a petitioner, informed the bench of "one change of circumstance". He said the state govt had appointed a committee and its recommendations have been forwarded to the CPCB. "If that is considered then perhaps something different is possible,'' he said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Get Intel Laptops With Exclusive Student Perks Intel Laptops | Search Ads Learn More Undo To the judge's query regarding the committee, advocate general Birendra Saraf replied that "considering it affects a large body of people, we appointed a committee to go into this entire aspect". He said the panel made suggestions that in certain circumstances, immersion may be permitted. "It may not be permitted in a lake, etc, but in a bigger body like oceans or something… in certain situations with certain safeguards it can be permitted." Saraf said that ultimately it is a process. "State govt also feels that ultimately even if we have to achieve this (ban), in some phase-wise manner it can be done... The committee's recommendations have been forwarded to the CPCB for consideration." Senior advocate Mihir Desai with advocate Ronita Bhattacharya Bector were representing PIL petitioners, including three activists and nine clay-based artisans seeking enforcement of the ban. Desai said that unless the CPCB changes its guidelines, the ban will remain in force. Warunjukar then urged that considering the time left for the Ganesh festival and that it takes four months for preparations, telephonic instructions should be taken from the Delhi-based CPCB. But the judges said the CPCB must examine the committee's report and file an affidavit. Warunjikar also expressed anxiety on behalf of his clients, saying that if the CPCB is going to take time to file its reply, then the HC must go ahead with a full-fledged hearing. The judges said it is not possible to hear the matter with HC closing later this week for summer vacation. They would take up the hearing immediately on the first day of HC reopening. The CPCB's advocate also sought time to take instructions and file a reply. Therefore the judges directed the CPCB to file a reply by June 1 and posted the hearing on June 9.
