SERVICE TAX ON IMMOVEABLE PROPERTY :STAY BY DELHI HIGH COURT AGAIN

The Delhi High Court has again stayed the imposition of service tax imposition on immovable property rentals in one of the Home Solutions cases, reaffirming its earlier stance. The order contradicted a Punjab & Haryana High Court order and put the ball back into the Supreme Court, which had asked for the Delhi High Court to adjudicate.

The Delhi High Court division bench comprising of Delhi High Court Chief Justice Dipak Mishra and justice Manmohan pressed for early adjudication of the matter by the apex court while observing the recent conflicting Punjab & Haryana High Court’s order to be merely persuasive and not binding

 

.............................................................

 

The Delhi HC allowed the interim stay to remain operative while concluding that the Supreme Court would be the final authority to decide on the substantive questions

source:

 

http://www.simpletaxindia.org/2010/12/service-tax-on-immoveable-property-stay.html

Anticipatory bails should be applicable till trial ends

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that once anticipatory bail is given, “the protection should ordinarily be available till the end of the trial” to the person who is either apprehending arrest in a criminal case or has been named accused by the investigating agency.

A two-judge SC bench comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and K S Radhakrishnan made these observations while granting anticipatory bail to one Siddharam Mhetre, a Congress leader from Maharashtra named accused in a murder of a BJP leader.

Ruling out the view taken by some superior courts that anticipatory bail should be for a limited period of time, the bench has observed that such orders are not in consonance with the Criminal Procedure Code and a judgment of the Constitution Bench of the SC.

It is a general practice adopted by courts in India that the competent courts grant anticipatory bail for a stipulated time to a person who is apprehending arrest. And the person procures regular bail from the trial court if the investigating agency arrests him within the stipulated time. If that time expires, then the person has to either go for the extension of the anticipatory bail or to get it afresh.

who does not come to the Court with clean hands is not entitled for any relief

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.6662 OF 2004

Ramjas Foundation and another               Versus                       Union of India and others

The principle that a person who does not come to the Court with clean hands is not entitled to be heard on the merits of his grievance and, in any case, such person is not entitled to any relief is applicable not only to the petitions filed under Articles 32, 226 and 136 of the Constitution but also to the cases instituted in others courts and judicial forums. The object underlying the principle is that every Court is not only entitled but is duty bound to protect itself from unscrupulous litigants who do not have any respect for truth and who try to pollute the stream of justice by resorting to falsehood or by making misstatement or by suppressing facts which have bearing on adjudication of the issue(s) arising in the case.

he above noted rules have been applied by this Court in large number of cases for declining relief to a party whose conduct is blameworthy and who has not approached the Court with clean hands - Hari Narain v. Badri Das AIR 1963 SC 1558, Welcome Hotel v. State of A.P. (1983) 4 SCC 575, G. Narayanaswamy Reddy v. Government of Karnataka (1991) 3 SCC 261, S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1, A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Government of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221, Prestige Lights Limited v. SBI (2007) 8 SCC 449, Sunil Poddar v. Union Bank of India (2008) 2 SCC 326, K.D. Sharma v. SAIL (2008) 12 SCC 481, G. Jayashree v. Bhagwandas S. Patel (2009) 3 SCC 141 and Dalip Singh v. State of U.P. (2010) 2 SCC 114.

Date of judgment: November 9, 2010.

Arbitration agreement & Res judicata

Absence of recital in the agreement as to which disputes were to be referred to the Arbitrator and not excluding certain claims/disputes from the purview thereof - Held, it must be presumed that the parties had agreed to submit to arbitration all disputes which have arisen or which may arise between them in respect of defined legal relationship - A view to the contrary would render such an arbitration agreement redundant. 

2010(4) Civil Court Cases 864 (Bombay)

Res judicata -Essential ingredients for the applicability of S.11 CPC are : (i) The matter must be directly and substantially in issue in the former suit and in the later suit; (ii) The prior suit should be between the same parties or persons claiming under them; (iii) Parties should have litigated under the same title in the earlier suit; (iv) The matter in issue in the subsequent suit must have been heard and finally decided in the first suit; (v) The court trying the former suit must have been competent to try particular issue in question - To define and clarify the principle contained in Section 11 of the Code, eight Explanations have been provided.

 2010(4) Civil Court Cases 905 (S.C.) : 2010(3) Apex Court Judgments 545 (S.C.)

Consumer Law and Agreement ousting Territorial Jurisdiction

Fact:

Clause 11 of the terms and conditions of sale provided that the Courts situated at Coimbatore city alone shall have the jurisdiction to try all or any dispute exclusively to the exclusion of all other Courts. Dispute arose. Dispute arose. Complaint filed before Hon’ble H.P. State Commission. Opposite Party took plea of the objection of territorial jurisdiction in terms of Clause 11. Issue reached before the Hon’ble National Commission.

The Hon’ble National Commission ruled that

The Clause 11 would not be applicable for consumer Fora is not a Court. Secondly, there is a difference in provisions of Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act and provisions in Sections 15 to 20 of the CPC insofar as place of jurisdiction is concerned.

The cause of action had undisputedly arisen at Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh and this would suffice to say sale confirmation letter would not be a bar in filing a complaint at Bilaspur. It may be mentioned that the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 11 could not be abridged by any agreement. If such an interpretation is put than the purpose of beneficial provisions of the Consumer Protection Act might be set at naught to a great extent for it would be difficult and cumbersome for a consumer to go to the distant place to contest the matter and to suffer more expenditure than what he would get.

Citations: I (2008) CPJ 404 NC

Associated Road Carriers Ltd. v/s Kamlender Kashyap

District forums can entertain all consumer disputes

New Delhi: All district forums in the capital have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain consumer disputes irrespective of the residence of parties, the Delhi State Consumer Commission has said. 

"The demarcation of the areas according to the police stations is only for the sake of administrative convenience and not for divesting the district forums to entertain the complaint against the complainant residing in an area not falling within jurisdiction of particular police station," the Commission bench comprising Members M L Sahni and Salma Noor, said.

The Commission passed the order on a petition of Swaranjeet Singh challenging the territorial jurisdiction of a district consumer forum to entertain the case of the complainant.

"Since Delhi happens to be one district and every district forum has territorial jurisdiction over every consumer dispute and if such forum takes any final decision in the matter irrespective of having no administrative territorial jurisdiction, the order cannot be set aside being vitiated," it said while dismissing his appeal.

Singh had approached the State Commission with the plea that the complaint filed by the complainant, Anil Kumar Dixit, is not maintainable on the point of jurisdiction.

Singh had contended that the dispute falls within the jurisdiction of district forum X (South) whereas the complaint was filed before district forum VI (New Delhi). 

Appeal No. FA-10/139                                        Date of Decision :   12.05.2010

similar FA'S:

FA-07/18 decided on 31.10.2007, FA-07/759 decided on 10.10.2008 and latest is FA-10/220 decided on 17.03.2010

in case of a UPC, presumption of service no longer holds good with various decisions of the Apex Cour

in case of a UPC, presumption is that the letter was posted and reached the destination unless contrary is proved, no longer holds good with various decisions of the Apex Court that the said presumption is rebuttable. Taking into consideration, the observation of the Apex Court in [1994] 1 SCC (supra), that the certificate of posting being easily obtainable, cannot be relied on, in view of the facts of this case, we decline to draw the presumption, on the basis of the certificate of posting and the affidavits of the employees of the sixth respondents, that the letter of 16-3-2000 was posted by the sixth respondent.

Equivalent citations: 2001 107 CompCas 535 CLB

Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs Arun Kumar Bajoria on 4/7/2001

a party who fails in the proceedings cannot benefit from the interim order issued during the pending of such proceedings

"a party who fails in the proceedings cannot benefit from the interim order issued during the pending of such proceedings"



IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1607 OF 2004
M/s Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Ltd.  Versus Transmission Corporation of A.P.
Ltd. and Anr
 (With CA Nos.1608-1609 of 2004 and CA No.4741 of 2006)

Para 24

It is manifest from the above that both on the question of restitution of the benefit drawn by a party during legal proceedings that eventually fail as also on the general principle that a party who fails in the main proceedings cannot benefit from the interim order issued during the pendency of such proceedings, this Court found against the consumers and upheld the demand for payment of additional charges recoverable on account of the delay in the payment of the outstanding dues. Far from lending any assistance to the appellant-company the decision squarely goes against it and has been correctly appreciated and applied by the High Court.

direction for invoking power u/s 156 (3) Cr. P. C.

Foods that Burn More Calories than They Contain

We need to scarf down plenty of calories in a day, but if you've got a nasty snack habit that's tipping the scales to heavy, weblog Bootstrapper's list of 15 foods that burn more calories than they contain might be the perfect addition to your grocery list. Called negative calorie foods, the following 15 treats actual burn more calories in their digestion than they offer, so you can fulfill your snack craving without the guilt of a bag of potato chips. From apples to zucchini, these foods make the perfect snacks. Hit the jump for the full list.

1. Celery
2. Oranges
3. Strawberries
4. Tangerines
5. Grapefruit
6. Carrots
7. Apricots
8. Lettuce
9. Tomatoes
10. Cucumbers
11. Watermelon
12. Cauliflower
13. Apples
14. Hot Chili Peppers
15. Zucchini

Keep in mind that a diet limited to only these foods could lead to malnutrition (according to Wikipedia), so don't go getting all unhealthy on us. But when snack time hits, these healthy, negative calorie foods sound like winners. For more opitons, check Wikipedia's longer list of negative calorie foods, and for a glimpse at other low-calorie snacks, check out the 200-calorie gallery.

Some Foods that Burn More Calories than they Contain

This can be sub-categorized into foods that burn more calories to digest, negative calorie foods and Thermogenic foods. The foods in this category can be further classified into fruits, vegetables and meat.

• Fruits such as blueberries, blackberries, grapefruit, lime, oranges, lemon, pineapple, plums, pears, strawberries and watermelons are high grade catabolic fruits.
• Vegetables such as broccoli, celery, asparagus, carrots, Brussels sprouts, eggplant, leeks, spinach, lettuce, tomato, sweet potato, celery, pepper and parsley leaves rank high as foods that burn more calories to digest.
• Meat sources include seafoods such as crabs, lobsters, mussels, shrimps, clamps and fishes like tuna, cod and flounders. Other low fat white meat also falls under this category of non-vegetarian catabolic foods.

Fruits

Apricots, Blackberries, Cantaloupe, Blackcurrant, Peaches, Plums, Damsons, Raspberries, Grapefruit, Rhubarb, Guava, Strawberries, Honeydew, Melon, Tangerines, Lemons, Watermelon.

Vegetables

Asparagus, Fennel, Gourd, Broccoli, Leek, Cabbage, Lettuce, Carrots, Marrow, Cauliflower, Peppers, Celery, Radishes, Chicory, Spinach, Cress, Tomatoes, Cucumbers, Turnips.

requirement of reasons to be recorded in order / judgment

Hon'ble Supreme Court summarizes the principles in the following terms (paragraph 55) in its judgment; 

a)     In India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. 

b)     A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions.

c)      Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well.

d)     Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative power.

e)     Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations.

f)        Reasons have virtually become as indispensable a component of a decision making process as observing principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial and even by administrative bodies.

g)     Reasons facilitate the process of judicial review by superior Courts.

h)      The ongoing judicial trend in all countries committed to rule of law and constitutional governance is in favour of reasoned decisions based on relevant facts. This is virtually the life blood of judicial decision making justifying the principle that reason is the soul of justice. 

i)        Judicial or even quasi-judicial opinions these days can be as different as the judges and authorities who deliver them. All these decisions serve one common purpose which is to demonstrate by reason that the relevant factors have been objectively considered. This is important for sustaining the litigants’ faith in the justice delivery system.

j)        Insistence on reason is a requirement for both judicial accountability and transparency. 

k)      If a Judge or a quasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his/her decision making process then it is impossible to know whether the person deciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of incrementalism. 

l)        Reasons in support of decisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or ‘rubber-stamp reasons’ is not to be equated with a valid decision making process.

m)   It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial powers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and decision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to broader scrutiny.  (See David Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor (1987) 100 Harward Law Review 731-737).

n)      Since the requirement to record reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making, the said requirement is now virtually a component of human rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See (1994) 19 EHRR 553, at 562 para 29 and Anya vs. University of Oxford, 2001 EWCA Civ 405, wherein the Court referred to Article 6 of European Convention of Human Rights which requires, “adequate and intelligent reasons must be given for judicial decisions”.

o)     In all common law jurisdictions judgments play a vital role in setting up precedents for the future. Therefore, for development of law, requirement of giving reasons for the decision is of the essence and is virtually a part of “Due Process”.

Court has no competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor the Court can direct an authority to act in contravention of statutory provisions

Please mail me at minturaj@gmail.com if any post/article required to be improved. Court has no competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor the Court can direct an authority to act in contravention of statutory provisions Competence of the District Forum and the hierarchy of the Tribunals constituted under the Act to entertain such a complaint respondent as a student is neither a consumer nor is the appellant rendering any service - Further, appellant is an autonomous body and the decision of the appellant and the statutory provisions have to be implemented through its officers - Hence, District Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain any such complaint - Entire exercise of entertaining the complaint by the District Forum and the award of relief approved by the National Commission do not conform to law - Judgment and order of the District Forum and the National Commission set aside Maharshi Dayanand University vs Surjeet Kaur

Offence u/s 138 of N I Act by the company

examination of the provisions relating to dishonour of cheques drawn by the company and to determine who are the persons who shall be responsible and can be made liable for an offence done by a company? Who is responsible to the company for the conduct of its business, and who could be said to be in-charge thereof? How does one identify such persons? Is it that a person by virtue of being a director, manager or secretary of a Company automatically becomes liable under this section? Is it necessary to have an averment in the complaint that at the time when this offence was committed, such a person was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of business of the company? Answer to the above questions by the Hon'ble HIGH COURT OF DELHI

MANISH PARWANI VERSUS THE NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ANOTHER
Crl. M.C. No. 450/2010
Judgment delivered on 03rd May, 2010

HC verdict boost for consumer rights

In a boost to protection of consumer rights, the Bombay High Court last week observed that penalty — imprisonment or fine — for non-compliance with the consumer forum’s directive was applicable to interim orders and not just final orders. ‘‘In matters pertaining to consumer protection, the law must be interpreted in favour of the consumer,’’ said the court. Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act states that any person or trader who fails to comply with ‘‘any order’’ given by the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, will be imprisoned for a term not less than a month or fined up to Rs 2,000. Stating that Section 27 makes no distinction between an interim and the final order, a division bench of Justice Ferdino I Rebello and Justice J H Bhatia said, ‘‘To give greater protection to the consumer and to make the execution of orders more effective and less expensive, which is the object of the Act, and to provide for speedy justice, we see no reason why the provisions contained in Section 27 should be restricted only to final orders.’’ WRIT PETITION NO.1035 OF 2009 R.B. Upadhyay v/s State Commission for Consumer and Disputes, AdministrativeVodafone Essar Ltd source:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/

New grounds cannot be added in arbitration appeal

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2928 OF 2010 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 3937 of 2009)

State of Maharashtra Versus M/s. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd

R.M. Lodha, J.

whether in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short `1996 Act') from an order refusing to set aside the award, an amendment in the memorandum of appeal to raise additional/new grounds can be permitted. answer NO

The Supreme Court (SC) last week dismissed the appeal of Maharashtra against the order of the Bombay high court in an arbitration dispute with Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. The company was given Stage IV of the Koyna Hydro Electric Project and differences arose over the amounts due and other issues. The disputes were referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The award was against the state and told to pay Rs 17 crore with interest. The government’s appeal was dismissed by the Ratnagiri district judge. It moved the high court, with additional grounds for opposing the award. The high court did not allow the new grounds. It appealed to the SC. It dismissed the appeal stating the government could not add new grounds to oppose the award after failing in the original petition. The judgement said: “New grounds containing new material/facts could not be introduced for the first time in an appeal when admittedly these grounds were not originally raised in the arbitration petition for setting aside the award.”

SOURCE:http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?autono=390800

No prosecution in cheque bounce case if issued as security

A) Criminal - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, s. 138 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, s. 378(4) - Acquittal - Challenged - Applicant filed complaint against respondent for having committed offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Act - Magistrate held that as ten blank cheques were obtained by the applicant bank while sanctioning/disbursing loan as security and one of them was used in the present case and there was bar of limitation and acquitted the respondent - Hence, present application u/s. 378(4), CrPC for leave to file appeal - Held, in the present case blank cheques were issued prior to disbursement of loan as a collateral security for loan which was sanctioned - In such case there was no existing debt or liability when the cheque was issued - So, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the case does not fall within offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Act - Criminal application dismissed.

(B) Criminal - Constitution - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, s. 138 - Object and purpose for introducing amendment to the Act - Held, object of the amendment and introduction of Chapter XVII in the Act by Act of 1988 was mainly to encourage all major transactions including commercial or business transactions through cheques and to enforce credibility and acceptability of cheques in settlement of liability in general - So, provisions like s. 138 of Act are salutary to give reliability, credibility and acceptability of negotiable instruments like cheques in daily life - However, the object was not to provide effective and speedy remedy for recovery of loans - So, it is doubtful if provisions of s. 138 of the Act would be attracted to a case in which a blank or post dated cheque is obtained by a bank or money lender before or while sanctioning or disbursing loan amount as security for the loan - Criminal application dismissed.
source:
http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:5jMiuQ0X-1MJ:maharashtra.indlaw.com/updates/judgments.aspx+Ramkrishna+Urban+Co-operative+Credit+Society+v/s+rajendra+warma&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 898 OF 2009

CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. RESERVED ON : 03.02.2010 PRONOUNCED ON : 16.02.2010

arbitration clause not a bar to the entertainment of the consumer complaint

As regards the plea of arbitration, that was rightly rejected by the State Commission for it should suffice to say that provisions of Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. We need not repeat that Section 3 is an additional remedy to the complainants in addition to all the remedies, which are otherwise available under the existing laws. Now it is settled that the arbitration clause would not be a bar to the entertainment of the complaint by the redressal agency constituted under the Act, even if the arbitration clause had been provided in an agreement or and if any reliance is required, one may refer to Ram Nath v. Improvement Trust, Bathinda 1994 (I) CPR
357.

Associated Road Carriers Ltd. vs Kamlender Kashyap And Ors. on 10/1/2008

citations: I (2008) CPJ 404 NC Bench: S K Member, B Taimni

place for filing the complaint u/s 138

The Delhi high court last week ruled in a cheque bouncing case that a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act should be filed in the court where the drawee bank is situated. In this case, Swastik Sales Corporation vs Advanced Medical Optics, the cheques were issued by Swastik in Mumbai on a bank there and was dishonoured there. The notice of demand was issued in Delhi. Following that the complaint was filed in Delhi. Swastik moved the high court for quashing the complaint arguing that the Delhi court had no jurisdiction to prosecute the case. The high court, relying on Supreme Court decisions, agreed with Swastik


Relevant fact of the case:


The complainant had not proved that cheque in question was issued and delivered to the accused in Delhi. There was no such allegation to this effect in the complaint and during the course of arguments also no such stand was taken by the complainant’s counsel. It is an admitted case that the petitioners (accused) are the resident of Mumbai and do not have either a residence or a place of work in Delhi. It is an admitted case that cheques in question were drawn on a bank in Mumbai and were dishonoured by that bank at Mumbai. It is also an admitted position that the notice of demand, though issued from Delhi, was sent to the petitioners at Mumbai. This is nowhere the case of the complainant that the notice of demand was served upon the petitioners in Delhi.

Crl.M.C.No. 842/2009 & Crl.M.C.No. 843/2009

Date of Order: 03rd March, 2010

powerful quotes

Our duty is to encourage every one in his struggle to live up to his own highest idea, and strive at the same time to make the ideal as near as possible to the Truth. Swami Vivekananda

Take up one idea. Make that one idea your life - think of it, dream of it, live on idea. Let the brain, muscles, nerves, every part of your body, be full of that idea, and just leave every other idea alone. This is the way to success.
Swami Vivekananda

We are what our thoughts have made us; so take care about what you think. Words are secondary. Thoughts live; they travel far.
Swami Vivekananda

Never think there is anything impossible for the soul. It is the greatest heresy to think so. If there is sin, this is the only sin; to say that you are weak, or others are weak.
Swami Vivekananda

New SC ruling on insurance services

Supreme Court of India CIVIL APPEAL NO.5611 of 1999

ECONOMIC TRANSPORT ORGANIZATION versus CHARAN S. MILLS (P) LTD

Judge(s): R. V. RAVE.,D.K. JAIN,P. SATHASIVAM ,J.M.PANCHAL

Date of Judgment: 17 February, 2010


The Supreme Court has held that an insurance company and the consignor (assured) can jointly sue a transporter or carrier for compensation towards deficiency of service.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices R V Raveendra, D K Jain, P Sathasivam and J M Panchal ruled the insurance company cannot be precluded from recovering the compensation from carrier as long as the complaint was jointly filed or under the power of attorney granted by the assured (consginor).

Babus’ assets come under RTI : Give Public Access To Info, Says CIC

Babus’ assets come under RTI
Give Public Access To Info, Says CIC

Mumbai: After politicians and Supreme Court judges, now the assets of babus have been prised open to public scrutiny. In a landmark order, the Central Information Commission has said disclosure of information such as assets of a public servant, routinely collected by the public authority, should be made available to the public under the Right to Information Act.
Passing the order in a case of an officer with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi noted that such disclosure could not be construed as an invasion on the privacy of an individual and therefore, it should be made public under the Act.
With the ruling that disclosure of assets by a babu is no longer a matter between just him and his superiors, officers have been put on par with politicians and SC judges who recently, bowing to pressure, agreed to open up their assets to public scrutiny.
The case came up for hearing with CIC after an RTI applicant’s query asking for details of assets and liabilities of the deputy health officer of MCD was rejected by both the PIO and the appellate authority.

Out In The Open

CIC says such info not ‘‘personal’’. Details of assets are collected routinely by public authorities
So far, disclosure of assets by babus an internal affair, between the official and his superior
CIC cites SC order that netas, who seek to be public servants by getting elected, declare property details Activists welcome CIC order on assets

Case:


UP resident Rajbir Singh had asked for details of immovable property declared by one Ashok Rawat, deputy health officer with MCD. He had also asked for details of assets which the officer had purchased for more than Rs 10,000 during his service with date of disclosure made to the department.
But both the PIO and first appellate authority rejected the query under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Information can be exempted under this section if it relates to personal information and the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual.
When the case came up for hearing, the CIC said that to qualify for this exemption, the information must be of a personal nature.
City-based RTI activists welcomed the order. “This will usher in greater transparency and we hope citizens will use this as an opportunity to expose corruption in the system,” said Bhaskar Prabhu, convener of Mahiti Adhikar Manch. Sources said the order was prompted by the recognition that declarations of assets by officers was not serving much purpose.

Managers can't be workmen, law must change: Bombay HC

Justice Chandrachud gave the verdict that could have a bearing on the contemporary corporate world while upholding the claim of Standard Chartered Bank that its sacked employee Vandana Joshi was in managerial cadre and not a clerk

the dispute arising out of the termination of services as a result of the expiry of the period of contract - not covered under ID Act

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: December 18, 2009
LPA No. 511 of 2009
RAM KISHAN versus MANAGEMENT OF M/S AMERICAN EXPRESS BANKING CORPORATION
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR