Latest news with #Rules
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
HC rules phone tapping cannot be used in regular crime detection
Chennai: Right to privacy is now an integral part of right to life and personal liberty; therefore, tapping of phone calls cannot be allowed in the regular detection of crime, Madras High Court has said. It can be resorted to only in a public emergency or in the interest of public safety, which are not secretive conditions or situations, Justice N Anand Venkatesh stated. Either of the situations would be apparent to a reasonable person. Covert surveillance of the type conducted in this case cannot fall within the aforesaid two situations contemplated under Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, he added. The court made the observations on a plea moved by P Kishore, managing director of Everonn Education Limited, seeking to quash a 2011 order issued by the CBI to intercept his telegraphic conversations and messages. Based on the phone tapping, the CBI arrested Kishore and Andasu Ravindar, who had accepted a bribe of 50 lakh from him to conceal that tax was payable on 116 crore. Opposing the plea, the CBI contended that the interception was necessary to prevent and investigate corruption, which also constitutes a threat to public safety. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai Refusing to concur, the court said that even as per the affidavit of the CBI, the intercepted conversations were not placed before the review committee in terms of Rule 419-A of the Rules. Thus, the govt cannot feign ignorance of the law when it purportedly issued the tapping order. The court added that the effect of a breach of public order would involve a wide spectrum of the public and does not involve a covert operation hatched and carried out in secrecy, such as the case on hand. The CBI, however, requested the court to expand the scope of Section 5(2) of the act to accommodate cases of this nature. To this, the court said, "This court is unable to accept this submission since the boundaries for invasion of a fundamental right through the medium of enacted law is a function of the legislature and not the court." The CBI further argued that even assuming that the tapping order was without jurisdiction, the evidence so collected is admissible since it is a well-settled proposition of law that even illegally collected evidence is admissible provided it is relevant. "An unconstitutional order is void under Article 13 of the Constitution and no rights or liabilities can flow from it," the court held. The court then allowed the plea and quashed the CBI order permitting the tapping of the petitioner's phone.
The Hindu
9 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
HC dismisses petitions pertaining to Tiruchendur temple consecration
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a batch of petitions that sought a direction to authorities to conduct the consecration of Subramaniya Swamy Temple in Tiruchendur by using Tamil spiritual mantras and hymns equally. A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete took cognisance of the counter affidavit filed by the Joint Commissioner / Executive Officer of the Temple. It was submitted that consecration will be conducted by using Tamil spiritual mantras and hymns. Dismissing the petitions, the court observed that the petitioners are unable to establish any right for the grant of the relief. In the absence of any right, the court cannot issue any direction. The procedures contemplated under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act and Rules are to be followed for administering temple functions. If there is no provision, then the government or the Commissioner should recognise certain practices, as the case may be, which were prevailing in a particular temple. However, such disputed claims cannot be decided by the court. These are all certain affairs, which are all to be considered by the HR & CE Department or the officers empowered under the provisions of the Act, the court observed. The court said that the petitioners are at liberty to approach the Commissioner for redressal of their grievance. On receipt of the representation, the Commissioner should look into it and take an appropriate decision. There cannot be any discrimination in the matter of treating the devotees or permitting the devotees to equally participate in the temple festival.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13 hours ago
- Business
- Business Standard
'Right not a favour', says HC on pension to disabled kids: what law says
When a government employee passes away, their dependent children with mental or physical disabilities are legally entitled to a lifetime family pension. Yet, experts point out that on ground things are a tad different. Red tape, unnecessary document demands, and long waiting periods make life difficult for the intended beneficiaries. A recent Madras High Court ruling is now being seen as a ray of hope for such families. The rule is clear, but delays are common 'Despite clear statutory protection under Rule 54(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, which allows for lifetime family pension for such dependents, authorities often insist on documents like income certificates that the law does not require,' said Sonal Alagh, founding partner at Alagh & Kapoor Law Offices. 'This reflects bureaucratic rigidity and causes immense hardship to families already grappling with caregiving responsibilities.' 'Even though the Rules only require medical certification of disability, the authorities often insist on additional proof, most commonly, an income certificate, which is beyond the Rules. This leads to prolonged processing times, often running into months or years, and, in many cases, outright rejections,' said Jeevan Ballav Panda, partner at Khaitan & Co. The case of Jerald, a mentally disabled son of a deceased forest officer, and Sujatha, the disabled daughter of a former acting chief justice of the Madras High Court, laid bare such administrative apathy. Both faced repeated requests for documents already submitted and endured long delays, noted Soayib Qureshi, partner at PSL Advocates & Solicitors. Judgment strengthens legal footing The High Court, in The Principal Accountant General (A&E) v. AV Jerald & Ors., unequivocally said that authorities cannot demand documents not prescribed under the rules. 'By linking timely pension payments to Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life and dignity), the court reaffirmed that pension is a legal right, not a favour,' Qureshi said. 'This ruling serves as a timely reminder for government departments to act quickly and humanely, especially when dependents suffer from intellectual disabilities,' added Nihal Bhardwaj, counsel at SKV Law Offices Required documents -- No income proof needed All four experts stressed the minimum required paperwork: Death certificate of the pensioner Proof of relationship with the dependent (e.g., birth certificate) Medical certificate from a government hospital or Medical Board confirming the disability and inability to earn a livelihood Guardianship certificate (only if the dependent is incapable of managing affairs) Identity proof (such as Aadhaar) 'Importantly, income certificates are not legally required. The focus is purely on disability,' Alagh emphasised. What families can do if the pension is delayed If a dependent's pension is held up despite submitting all required documents, families can escalate in stages: File a formal representation with pension authorities citing Rule 54(6) and the Madras HC judgment Approach tribunals or file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if ignored Lodge a grievance on CPENGRAMS, the central pension grievance portal 'Maintain detailed records of submissions. Courts have taken a firm stance against unjustified delays,' Qureshi advised. A precedent with nationwide reach Though from the Madurai Bench, this ruling is already being seen as a strong precedent. 'It aligns with the Supreme Court's stand in Bhagwanti Mamtani versus Union of India (1995) and offers a legal foundation that families across India can rely upon,' said Alagh. With expert backing and a supportive judicial interpretation, the message is clear: families of disabled dependents have a right-- not a request-- to pension, and they now have the legal tools to assert it.
Time of India
15 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Andhra Pradesh notifies capital region land pooling scheme rules, 2025
AMARAVATI : The Andhra Pradesh government on Tuesday notified the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Land Pooling Scheme (Formulation and Implementation) Rules, 2025, which will govern the unique method of pooling land for building the greenfield capital city of Amaravati. S Suresh Kumar, principal secretary to the government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, said these rules shall apply to the 'capital region' except the 'capital city area' which will continue to be governed by the Andhra Pradesh Capital City Land Pooling Scheme (Formulation and Implementation) Rules, 2015. "In keeping with the will of the Government to build 'People's Capital' and for building the necessary concomitant infrastructural projects like airports, ports and all other necessary projects, the procurement mechanism of the land has been designed to be a voluntary scheme," said Kumar in a government order (GO). It is based on mutual consensus between the landowners and the state/authority, said Kumar, adding that this is a unique method of procurement of land, which is named and styled as 'Land Pooling Scheme'. The 'Land Pooling Scheme' rules come at a time when the government is planning to turn greenfield capital city Amaravati into a 'mega city' by combining adjacent Mangalagiri, Tadepalli, Guntur, and Vijayawada with Amaravati. This endeavour aims to pool an additional 40,000 acres of land, besides the 54,000 acres of land on which the government is already sitting for Amaravati. The government is planning to build an international airport in Amaravati. The 'Land Pooling Scheme' has been designed for developing the Capital Region wherein the land parcels owned by individual farmers and owners or group of owners are consolidated by the authority under a development scheme, he said. According to Kumar, the 'Land Pooling Scheme' is a better scheme formulated by the Andhra Pradesh State Legislature owing to the mandate enabled under Sections 107 and 108 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. "The broad objective of the scheme is to do justice to the families affected by the construction of a Livable and Sustainable Capital Region for the State of Andhra Pradesh and also to the farmers and land owners in the Capital Region and also to make them avail a better compensation and also with a view to make them Partners in the State Development Process," said the principal secretary. It is designed in such a manner that the participant land owners are fairly compensated with the allotment of the reconstituted plot along with the developed infrastructure, among other benefits, said Kumar.
The Wire
18 hours ago
- Business
- The Wire
'Every Tom, Dick and Harry is Authorised to Issue Content Takedown Orders': X Tells Karnataka HC
New Delhi: Lawyers of social media platform X – owned by billionaire Elon Musk – have told an Indian court that every "Tom, Dick, and Harry" government official have been authorised to issue content takedown orders. This statement made by X's lawyer K.G. Raghavan before the Karnataka high court on Tuesday (July 1) drew a sharp rebuke from the Union government's counsel. During the court hearing, Raghavan said that X had recently received a notice from the railways department to remove a video in which a car was being driven on a railway track. He told the court that while it was news the government found it unlawful. "This is the danger, My Lord, that is done now, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry officer is authorised," Raghavan told the high court, reported Reuters. Raghavan's statement resulted in immediate condemnation from solicitor general Tushar Mehta. 'Officers are not Tom, Dick, or Harry ... they are statutory functionaries. No social media intermediary can expect completely unregulated functioning,' said Mehta. During the hearing presided by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, senior advocate Aditya Sondhi, appearing for an association of digital media houses, who has filed an intervention application argued, 'We are content creators who are ultimately affected by any take-down orders,' reported LiveLaw. Justice Nagaprasanna also took objection to the 'Tom Dick and Harry" remarks. 'These are officers of the Union of India. I take objection to this. They are officers and not Tom, Dick and Harry,' said Justice Nagaprasanna during the hearing. X has approached the court seeking a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) IT Act does not confer the authority to issue information blocking orders and such orders can only be issued after following the procedure under Section 69A of the Act read with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules. It is also seeking a direction to various ministries of the Union of India from taking coercive or prejudicial action against X in relation to any 'Information Blocking Orders' issued other than those issued in accordance with section 69A of the IT Act, read with the blocking rules. The court posted the matter for final hearing on July 8 and permitted the petitioner to amend the petition and implead different ministries of the Union of India.
