Latest news with #KKVenugopal
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Centre in SC opposes Kerala's move to withdraw plea against Governor over bill assent delay
NEW DELHI: The Centre on Monday reiterated its stand and opposed Kerala government's plea to withdraw its petition against the Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. Senior advocate and former Attorney General (AG) of India, K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea from the top court by saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case on April 8. This was vehemently opposed by the Centre through its top law officer, the AG of India, R. Venkataramani, and Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, as they urged the court to await the Apex Court's decision on the reference of the President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills. "Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential reference," Mehta argued before the apex court. Venugopal continued to plead before the top court, questioning how his plea could be opposed. Finding no rationale in the Centre's arguments, he submitted, 'Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition?' The former top law officer said that the issues raised in this case will be further dealt with by the Supreme Court when hearing the 14 questions raised in the Presidential Reference on the assent of state bills by a Governor and the President under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
Centre opposes Kerala's stand in SC to withdraw case against Governor
Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala govt, sought to withdraw the plea saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the TN Governor case Press Trust of India New Delhi The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned to July 25 the pleas of the Kerala government against Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar deferred the matter after attorney general R Venkataramani sought time. Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case. Venkataramani and solicitor general Tushar Mehta opposed the submission and urged the court to await the top court's decision on the reference of President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills. Mehta said the Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential reference. Calling it strange , Venugopal asked how could his plea be opposed. "Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition? There has to be some only means both parties will charge money," he said. The bench then remarked, "We will make it very clear, tentatively there can't be an objection to withdraw." The matter was then posted on July 25. On April 22, the top court said it would examine whether the recent judgement on a plea of Tamil Nadu, fixing timelines for the grant of assent to bills, covered the issues raised by the Kerala government in its pleas. Acting on a plea of Tamil Nadu government, an apex court bench on April 8 set aside the reservation of the 10 bills for President's consideration in the second round holding it as illegal, erroneous in law. The bench, for the first time, also prescribed a time limit for President to decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by Governor. It set a three-month timeframe from the date on which such reference was received. Kerala sought similar directions in its petition. In 2023, the top court expressed displeasure over then Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan "sitting" for two years on bills passed by the state legislature. Khan is currently Governor of Bihar. The top court, on July 26, last year, agreed to consider the plea of opposition-ruled Kerala alleging the denial of assent to bills passed by the legislative assembly. The Kerala government alleged that Khan referred certain bills to President Droupadi Murmu and those were yet to be cleared. Taking note of the pleas, the top court issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala Governor. The state said its plea related to the acts of Governor in reserving seven bills, which he was required to deal with himself, to the President. Not one of the seven bills had anything to do with Centre-state relations, it argued. The bills were pending with the Governor for as long as two years and his action "subverted" the functioning of the state legislature, rendering its very existence "ineffective and otiose", the state added. "The bills include public interest bills that are for the public good, and even these have been rendered ineffective by the Governor not dealing with each one of them 'as soon as possible', as required by the proviso to Article 200," the plea said. The state government had said the home ministry informed it that President had withheld assent to four of the seven bills -- University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021; Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022; University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022; and University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 2022. The Constitution is silent on how much time the President can take in granting assent to a bill passed by a state legislature and referred to the Rashtrapati Bhavan for presidential consideration or for denying consent. Article 361 of the Constitution says the President, or Governor of a state, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
30-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Supreme Court admits Byju's insolvency appeals
Bengaluru: The Supreme Court has admitted two appeals in the ongoing insolvency proceedings of Think & Learn, the parent entity of the embattled edtech firm Byju's, filed by the company's promoters and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The apex court has scheduled the next hearing for July 21 where it will consider interim reliefs sought by the petitioners. The cases stem from the insolvency application filed by the BCCI, which alleged unpaid dues from Byju's, a former Team India sponsor. However, both BCCI and Byju's claimed that a Rs 158 crore settlement was reached and fully executed before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The promoters are seeking withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) based on this pre-CoC agreement. Senior Advocate KK Venugopal, appearing for the Byju's promoters, argued that the BCCI settlement was "fully agreed upon, paid, and formally communicated to the interim resolution professional well before the CoC was constituted." Supporting the plea, senior counsel Guru Krishna Kumar told the court that the company's US assets are at risk, alleging that the resolution professional (RP) withdrew American legal proceedings initiated by Think & Learn against its lenders. The Supreme Court did not grant a stay on asset disposal but said it would evaluate interim relief at the next hearing. Notices were issued to the former interim resolution professional Pankaj Srivastava, current RP Shailendra Ajmera, Byju's director Riju Ravindran, and Glas Trust, representing the US lenders. The promoters' legal challenge comes after the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) refused to allow the insolvency withdrawal, citing the formation of the CoC. The dispute adds a fresh layer to the high-stakes financial and legal troubles surrounding Byju's, which has been under intense scrutiny from regulators, creditors, and investors over the past year. The outcome of the July 21 hearing could determine whether Byju's can exit the insolvency process based on the timing and validity of the BCCI settlement.
Time of India
29-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
BCCI settlement: Supreme Court to hear Byju's insolvency appeals
BENGALURU: The has admitted two appeals in the ongoing insolvency proceedings of Think & Learn, the parent entity of Byju's. The appeals were filed by the company's promoters and cricket body BCCI. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The apex court has scheduled the next hearing for July 21. The cases stem from the insolvency application filed by the BCCI, which alleged unpaid dues from Byju's, a former Team India sponsor. However, both BCCI and Byju's claimed that a Rs 158-crore settlement was reached and executed before the constitution of the committee of creditors (CoC). The promoters are seeking withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) based on this pre-CoC agreement. Senior advocate KK Venugopal, appearing for the Byju's promoters, argued that the BCCI settlement was "fully agreed upon, paid, and formally communicated to the interim resolution professional well before the CoC was constituted." Supporting the plea, senior counsel Guru Krishna Kumar told the court that the company's US assets are at risk, alleging that the resolution professional withdrew American legal proceedings initiated by Think & Learn against its lenders. The promoters' legal challenge comes after the NCLAT refused to allow the insolvency withdrawal, citing the formation of CoC. The dispute adds a fresh layer to the legal troubles surrounding Byju's, which has been under intense scrutiny from regulators, creditors, and investors over the past year. The July 21 hearing could determine whether Byju's can exit the insolvency process based on the timing and validity of the BCCI settlement.
New Indian Express
29-05-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
Byju's insolvency: SC admits cases filed by company's promoters
BENGALURU: The Supreme Court on Thursday admitted the cases filed by the promoters of edtech firm Byju's in connection with the ongoing insolvency proceedings. The apex court has scheduled the next hearing on July 21. Byju's lawyers challenged the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Chennai Bench decision that denied withdrawal of insolvency proceedings initiated by the BCCI. Senior Counsel KK Venugopal said, 'A Rs 158 crore settlement between Byju's and BCCI was fully agreed upon, paid, and formally communicated to the IRP (The resolution professional) well before the CoC (Committee of Creditors) was constituted.' Senior Counsel Guru Krishna Kumar sought relief from the Supreme Court, 'The Resolution Professional (IRP) handling Think & Learn's (Byju's) insolvency in India, has withdrawn legal proceedings in the US initiated by Think and Learn against the lenders. This is leading to substantial assets of the company in the US being disposed off."
