Bombay High Court : 2019 Highlights

Like every year, the Bombay High Court in 2019 witnessed a flurry of fresh PILs and petitions filed and pronounced orders/judgements in plenty of old cases.Here is a look at the some of the most significant judgements/orders of the Bombay High Court in the past year.MARATHA RESERVATIONNo Constitutional Bar To Reservation Exceeding 50%; Bombay HC upholds Maratha ReservationBombay High Court upheld the validity of reservation granted to the Maratha community by the state government under the socially and educationally backward class category (SEBC) in government jobs and educational institutions.However, the Court held that 16% reservation granted is not justifiable and ruled that reservation should not exceed 12% in employment and 13% in education as recommended by Backward Commission.The bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice Bharati Dangre referred to the majority view in Supreme Court's judgement in Indira Sawhney & Ors vs Union of India and observed-"We are therefore, inclined to hold that it is ultimately the State on whom the burden is cast to justify the excess reservation and since the 50% ceiling limit is not exhaustive of all the categories. As Justice Jeevan Reddy has expressed in the majority view that the extent of reservation depends upon the proportion of backward classes to the total population and their representation in public services. It is also by now settled that backwardness being a relative term, it must be judged by the general level of advancement of the entire population of the country or the State, as the case may be, and therefore, determination of backwardness is best left to the respective State."AAREYHC allows cutting of trees at Aarey Colony for Metro Car Shed ProjectOne of the most publicised cases of the year was the PILs and petitions challenging the Tree Authority's decision to allow cutting of 2646 trees at Aarey colony for developing a car shed for Mumbai Metro. Court dismissed all petitions and allowed the cutting of trees.Other questions decided by the bench of Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Bharati Dangre were, whether Aarey is a 'forest' and the need for protection of the Mithi river flood plain at Aarey, where construction is prohibited.Court refrained from ruling on the aspect of Aarey being a 'forest' under the Forest Conservation Act and said that the issue is to be decided by the Supreme Court or the National green Tribunal as proceedings on the same issue are pending before them.However, comparing environmentalists to David and the development work (Metro Car Shed) as industrial 'Goliath', the bench observed-"Repeatedly, Davids (environmentalist) take on industrial Goliath's. Relationship with nature and love for environment alone is true and all other relationships are unreal and temporary, is their belief. Their hearts are a temple of devotion to flora and fauna. In the instant case, the Davids row their boat with faith, courage and devotion in the storm of development; but directionless. The Greens fail in the instant petition because they have lost touch with the procedure to be followed as per law."Subsequently, three days after HC's judgement, Supreme Court ordered a status quo on felling of trees after the ASG Tushar Mehta assured the apex court that no further trees will be cut, but the damage had already been done as most of the trees were cut right after High Court's judgement.BHIMA KOREGAONIn the Battle of Koregaon Bhima, an army led by Peshwa Baji Rao II fought against East India Company's men, many of whom belonged to the Mahar caste. A total of 49 soldiers were killed in that battle and 22 of these belonged to the Mahar caste (treated as untouchables earlier).To commemorate the deaths of these fallen Dalit soldiers, East India Company commissioned a victory obelisk in Koregaon Bhima. This is where, Dalits gathered in large numbers on January 1, 2018 to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Koregaon Bhima. Clashes began and led to the death of one and caused injuries to several hundred persons.Pune police arrested activists and academicians across the country linking them to the said violence. According to the police, Rona Wilson, Varvara Rao, Arun Ferreira, Sudha Bharadwaj, Gautam Navlakha and Anand Teltumbde were allegedly involved in inciting the violence and also had Maoist links. All the alleged accused have been in jail for over a year except Gautam Navlakha and Anand Teltumbde, who are currently enjoying protection from arrest.SC sets aside Bombay HC judgement Refusing Additional Time to the Police to file ChargesheetIn October last year, the High Court set aside a Pune court order granting more time to the police for filing a charge sheet against lawyer Surendra Gadling and others accused in the case. In February 2019, Supreme Court set aside Bombay High Court's judgement which had refused to grant additional time beyond 90 days under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for filing the charge sheet.HC...

Bombay High Court : 2019 Highlights

Nitish Kashyap

Tags