Latest news with #RP)Act
Business Recorder
29-05-2025
- Business
- Business Recorder
LHC rules market committees can fix rents, penalise defaulters
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has held that a market committee (MC) is competent to fix market based rents with respect to its leased properties. The court observed that a market committee is required no approval or special or general direction of the government or a person authorised with respect to fixation of rent of already leased properties. The court said a market committee is also empowered to cancel registration of market functionaries in case of default in payment of dues and can also initiate civil and criminal proceedings with respect to punishment to defaulters and recovery of dues as arrears of land revenue. The court dismissed a petition of Anjuman Dukandaran Samdani Market against Chairman Market Committee Toba Tek Singh for increasing rents of the shops. The court said the MC as owner of the shops can determine reasonable rent which must be accepted and paid by the tenants, the court added. The court, however, observed that it is reasonably expected that the rents should be based on prevalent market rates and are settled with mutual consultation of the stakeholders. The court observed that a market committee is required to generate maximum resources and is expected to expand the same in the provision of facilities to realize the objectives of its establishment and does not remain dependent upon the grants made by the government. The court said nothing has been brought on record that the assessment so provided did not reflect prevailing market rents. Nothing has been placed on record that any bye-laws of MC exist regarding the management and operation of public markets has been violated in fixation of rent of shops, the court added. The court said that there is no substance in the contention of the petitioner that the rent could not be increased by more than 10% per annum or 25% after 3 years as there is no such stipulation in the Rented Premises (RP) Act. There is no prohibition in the RP Act that the existing rents could not be enhanced or rationalized subject to existing tenancy agreements to conform to market realities, the court added. The court said it is also manifest from record that meaningful and elaborate consultation has already taken place between the stakeholders and a substantial number of shopkeepers are already paying enhanced rent. The court observed that in case of undue resistance or abuse of the process as is manifest in the instant case, a market committee is equipped with necessary powers under the Act to enforce its decision in accordance with law. The court said due process has been adopted during assessment of rent of shops which is liable to be paid by the members of the Anjuman and in case of non-payment, the defaulting members of the Anjuman are liable to be dealt with in accordance with law, the court concluded. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
The Print
21-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Curious case of convicted BJP MLA Kanwarlal Meena—denied SC relief, in jail, but yet to be disqualified
In the previous Lok Sabha, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi was disqualified as a member on 23 March 2023, just a day after his conviction and sentencing by a Gujarat court in a defamation case. Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan was disqualified as a member of the Uttar Pradesh assembly a day after an MP-MLA court in Rampur sentenced him to three years in jail in hate speech cases. Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951 provides for disqualification of a lawmaker if he or she is convicted for an offence that entails a minimum sentence of two years. New Delhi: Nearly three weeks after the Rajasthan High Court upheld his conviction and three-year prison sentence in a 2005 case—and two weeks after the Supreme Court denied him relief—BJP leader Kanwarlal Meena continues to be a member of the state assembly. The Congress has slammed this as a 'murder of the Constitution'. So, Kanwarlal Meena being able to keep his house membership despite 19 days since his conviction was upheld has raised eyebrows. A court in Aklera of Jhalawar district held Meena guilty of threatening a civil servant in 2005 and sentenced him to three years in jail in 2020. The decision was later upheld by the Rajasthan High Court 2 May. The BJP MLA moved the Supreme Court which directed him to surrender in trial court in two weeks. The deadline ended Wednesday. He has surrendered before a court. Meanwhile, he has also filed a review petition in the SC. While hearing Meena's Special Leave Petition 8 May, the Supreme Court observed, 'Elected representatives need to discipline themselves. This is one of rare cases where somebody has been convicted, otherwise you do everything and get away with it without any action against you.' The Rajasthan Congress moved Speaker Vasudev Devnani and Governor Haribhau Kisanrao Bagde seeking Meena's disqualification under the provisions of the RP Act, 1951. State Congress president Govind Singh Dotasra Monday resigned from one of the assembly standing committees in protest. A Congress delegation also met the governor Monday. 'There cannot be two sets of laws in one country,' Dotsra told ThePrint. 'Rahul Gandhi's membership was terminated within 24 hours and an MLA in Rajasthan has been sentenced to three years. The bench of three judges of the Supreme Court also did not give him relief. Yet, the Speaker has not disqualified him in 19 days.' He added: 'In the Lily Thomas case (2013), the Supreme Court said the day the punishment is passed, the membership will be cancelled immediately. Now, even after 19 days, why is Meena's membership not being terminated? The Speaker is sitting on the file and it is being moved here and there.' Dotasra claimed efforts are being made to pardon the MLA through the governor under Article 161. 'But rule 161 does not apply in the Meena case. The chief minister also went to the governor in this regard. The Supreme Court has also said the MLA will have to surrender in two weeks. Now two weeks have also been completed. They have made a mockery of law.' Also Read: In Rahul Gandhi's disqualification, Modi-Shah lay an electoral trap for Congress The 2005 case On February 3, 2005, Meena threatened then SDM Ram Niwas Mehta at gunpoint, pressuring him to recommend re-polling for the post of deputy sarpanch in the Khatakhedi village near Manohar Thana. Meena took out a revolver and asked Mehta to announce a repoll within two minutes. The SDM told Meena a revolver can kill but not enforce a repoll. While the trial court initially acquitted Meena, the additional district judge (ADJ) court in Aklera convicted him in 2020, imposing a three-year sentence and a fine of ₹3 lakh. Meena was in the news also in 2023 in connection with the abduction case of BJP MLA Lalit Meena allegedly at the behest of Vasundhara Raje's son Dushyant Singh, at a time when hectic political activities were going on in the state for picking a chief minister. Rahul to Azam: Leaders disqualified under RP Act Gandhi was found guilty of criminal defamation by a Surat court for his remark on PM Narendra Modi's surname at an election rally in 2019 and was sentenced to two years in jail 23 March 2023. He got bail and was given 30 days to appeal, but the court did not suspend his conviction. The Lok Sabha secretariat issued the Wayanad MP's disqualification notice 24 March. In a note issued 13 October 2015, the Election Commission asked state chief secretaries to direct departments concerned to ensure cases of convictions of sitting MPs or MLAs were brought to the notice of the speaker or the house chairperson. More than a dozen lawmakers have been disqualified under the act since 2013 when the Supreme Court struck down relief under section 8(4) of RP Act which gave convicted MPs and MLA three months time to appeal and save their memberships. Senior leaders like Lalu Prasad (fodder scam), the late Jayalalithaa (disproportionate assets case) and NCP MP Mohd Faizal (attempt to murder case) were among the lawmakers disqualified under the act. Gandhi and Faizal's suspensions were later revoked. 'No provision in Constitution about time-frame' Sources close to Meena told ThePrint he surrendered Wednesday per the Supreme Court deadline. 'Now the ball is in the court of the governor and the court. There is no provision in Constitution about time-frame when the Speaker will act.' Meena's aides also denied the MLA has requested the governor to grant him pardon. They claimed the MLA was waiting for the Supreme Court's decision. Rajasthan BJP spokesperson Laxmikant Bhardwaj said the issue of disqualification is between the speaker and the MLA concerned. 'And the speaker has to make a decision on his disqualification. Maybe the MLA is exploring his last legal options.' Sources close to Speaker Vasudev Devnani told ThePrint, 'The speaker has consulted legal minds and is waiting for the Supreme Court decision on this matter. This has delayed the decision.' But Congress spokesperson Swarnim Chaturvedi asked, 'Why is he being given so much time to explore legal options? Why was he not disqualified immediately? Why is the Speaker waiting for his Supreme Court review petition? It's a murder of the Constitution. There can't be separate laws for BJP leaders and opposition leaders.' (Edited by Ajeet Tiwari) Also Read: 'Should have been more careful' — Surat court order rejecting Rahul Gandhi's plea for stay on conviction
Indian Express
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
In eye of storm over revolver case, Rajasthan BJP MLA – Raje loyalist to disqualification
Rajasthan BJP MLA Kanwarlal Meena is set to be disqualified from the Assembly after the Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed his petition challenging the state High Court's May 2 order, which upheld his three-year conviction by a lower court and directed him to surrender 'immediately' in a 2005 case for threatening a Rajasthan Administrative Service (RAS) officer with a revolver. The apex court's order effectively means that Meena would lose his membership of the state Assembly. As per Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951, the conviction of a lawmaker for an offence with a two-year sentence or more leads to his / her disqualification from the House. Rajasthan Assembly Speaker Vasudev Devnani said he is taking the opinion of the Advocate General and other senior lawyers on the issue of Meena's disqualification, adding that a decision on the same will be taken 'soon, as per the rules, and within the time limit'. While not the first instance in Rajasthan, this would be one of the rare cases for a sitting MLA to be disqualified in the state. The last such instance happened in December 2016, when the then Assembly Speaker Kailash Meghwal had terminated the Assembly membership of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) MLA B L Kushwah after he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in an 'honour' killing matter. For Meena, it might put a pause on his direct involvement in electoral politics – a legislator being disqualified under the RP Act cannot contest for six years after the date of completion of his sentence. However, like Kushwah, who had fielded his wife after his disqualification, it may not be the end of the road for Meena. A two-time MLA, Meena, 50, currently represents the Anta constituency in Baran district. During the hearing in the top court, senior advocate and former Orissa High Court chief justice S Muralidhar pointed out that Meena 'has 27 cases against him, of which 15 were even before the said incident' and that 'after this case, 12 more cases were filed'. He called the attacks on public servants Meena's 'specialisation'. The revolver case pertains to February 2005, when Ramniwas Mehta, then a RAS officer posted as the Sub Divisional Officer in Aklera, was informed of a group of people in Manohar Thana, Jhalawar, blocking the road to demand repolling in an up-sarpanch election. When Mehta and others reached the spot, Meena, who arrived with 6-7 men in a vehicle about half an hour later, took out a revolver and aimed it at Mehta's head asking him to 'announce a repoll within two minutes or get killed'. Mehta, as per records, told Meena that 'a revolver can kill but not enforce a repoll'. Mehta, later promoted as an IAS officer, is currently posted as the Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC). In January 2016, Meena and his men, armed with sticks, had allegedly attacked several social activists and their vehicles in Jhalawar. The activists of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), an NGO founded by Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey, were taking out a 'Jawabdehi Yatra' (accountability march) across the then chief minister Vasundhara Raje's home turf Jhalawar. Meena, then BJP MLA from Manohar Thana in Jhalawar district, and his men were accused of publicly molesting, manhandling, abusing, and beating up women activists. The MLA himself was accused of groping and slapping the women. It was also alleged that he was backed by then CM Raje. Roy and Dey had charged that then home minister Gulab Chand Kataria told them that he was unable to act against Meena since his 'file' had been 'stopped' by Raje, even as Kataria denied their claim. In this matter, an FIR was lodged against Meena under various sections including rioting, wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing grievous hurt, and assault or criminal force against a woman with intent to outrage her modesty. However, he was acquitted by the trial court and later by the ADJ court. An MKSS activist, Mukesh Goswami said they are, however, still pursuing the case in the high court. While giving its order Wednesday, the apex court, in oral remarks, said: 'Elected representatives need to discipline themselves…this is one of those rare cases where somebody has been convicted otherwise you do everything and anything and get away with it, without any action against you.' Mukesh said, 'Such people who have a criminal mindset should not be given a ticket by any party. During elections too, we had written to BJP president J P Nadda and requested him to not give a ticket to Kanwarlal Meena.' A strongman, Meena has kept a relatively low profile beyond his area of influence. He was first elected from Manohar Thana on the BJP ticket in 2013, defeating the Congress's Kailash Chand with a 20% vote margin. Meena won the 2023 polls from the Anta seat, about three hours' drive from Manohar Thana. After his election, he was in the news again. As the wait for the naming of a new CM by the BJP leadership continued following the party's victory in the polls in December 2023, Hemraj Meena, father of Kishanganj BJP MLA Lalit Meena, alleged that his son was taken to a resort on the outskirts of Jaipur and sequestered there by Raje's son Dushyant Singh, an MP, even as the Raje camp called the entire matter a 'conspiracy'. Hemraj had alleged that Lalit was among five MLAs at the resort from Jhalawar and Baran districts and that Kanwarlal Meena played the 'main role' in this episode. He also alleged that it was Meena who had stopped him and 'was ready for a brawl', adding that 'Kanwarlal was saying, talk to Dushyant Singh before you can take him away. I called Dushyant but he did not answer the call'. However, talking to The Indian Express then, Meena had dismissed it as a 'plot to malign Dushyant Singh's name'.
Indian Express
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Karnataka HC dismisses plea challenging CM Siddaramaiah's election from Varuna constituency
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition challenging Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's election from the Varuna Assembly constituency, alleging that the 'five guarantees' promises in the Congress's manifesto were corrupt practices under the Representation of People (RP) Act. 'The 'guarantees' which are promised freebies in the manifesto cannot be considered to constitute a corrupt practice under Section 123 of R P Act in light of the law laid down by the apex court…in the case of legislators belonging to the Indian National Congress Party who had contested elections for Karnataka Legislative Assembly for the term 2023 to 2028, identical allegations have been made in election petitions filed against them,' a single-judge bench of Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav said on Tuesday. The election petition was filed by K Shankara, a voter in the Varuna constituency, who argued that the election results should be declared void on account of corrupt practices under the Act. He argued, amongst other contentions, that the 'five guarantees' in the election manifesto amounted to a corrupt practice and those whose photos appeared on those manifestos, like Siddaramaiah, would be liable. Siddaramaiah's counsel argued that the allegations of corruption were not substantiated, with the policies in the manifesto being welfare schemes and not corrupt practices. It was also pointed out that, as per the Supreme Court case of S Subramaniam Balaji v State of Tamil Nadu and Others, promises in a manifesto would not count as corrupt practices. The Karnataka High Court agreed with the contention that the Supreme Court had dealt with the question of manifestos, observing that similar petitions against other Congress leaders had also been dealt with. Siddaramaiah's counsel had also pointed out certain errors and repetitions from similar petitions. The high court stated that this indicated a 'very casual attitude' in drafting an election dispute. 'It must be noticed that an election petition has serious repercussions and by law it is mandated that an election petition requires careful drafting and the present petition does not evidence attention to necessary details and is drafted in a very casual manner,' the high court said.
New Indian Express
23-04-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Karnataka HC rejects plea against Siddaramaiah's election from Varuna
BENGALURU: Stating that there is no averment in the petition as to how the 'five guarantees' have materially affected the result of the election, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday rejected the petition filed by a voter of Varuna assembly constituency, questioning Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's election as MLA in 2023. 'If the assertion of 'guarantees' was grounds to set aside the election, the question of invoking the same to declare an election to be void would require an act by the returned candidate. Admittedly, the 'guarantees' flow from a promise made in the manifesto of the party, and cannot be attributed to the candidate, and accordingly, the question of invoking Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the RP Act in the present case does not arise, to declare the candidate is not qualified to be chosen from Varuna assembly constituency,' said Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav, rejecting the election petition. 'The plaint is liable to be rejected both on the ground of 'want of cause of action' as well as being barred by law,' the court said, allowing an interlocutory application filed by Siddaramaiah against the petition. The petitioner, K Shankara from Koodanahalli in Mysuru district, questioned the election of Siddaramaiah as MLA, mainly on the grounds that the five guarantees are construed as corrupt practices amounting to bribery and undue influence in terms of Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act. The court noted that the 'guarantees', which are promises of freebies, cannot be considered to constitute a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the RP Act in the light of the law laid down by the apex court in the S Subramaniam Balaji case. Even the petitioner's contention that Siddaramaiah had affixed his signature to the handout and thus adopted the manifesto as his own, is required to be rejected as the handout is an appeal by the party to vote for its candidate. The affixing of signature on the handout is 'only in the capacity of a CLP (Congress Legislative Party) leader and not more', the court said.
