1 May 2016 5:36 PM GMT
On NEETSupreme Court of India has ordered to conduct the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2016 in Two Phases. The first phase will be conducted on 1st May and Second phase will be on 24th July. The entire results will be declared on 17th August. The admission Procedure will be completed on 30th September.Supreme Court of India also rejected the Central Government’s Plea to...
Supreme Court of India has ordered to conduct the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2016 in Two Phases. The first phase will be conducted on 1st May and Second phase will be on 24th July. The entire results will be declared on 17th August. The admission Procedure will be completed on 30th September.
Supreme Court of India also rejected the Central Government’s Plea to change the Schedule of National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2016
SC stays Gujarat HC contempt proceedings against High Court Bar Association President
The Supreme Court stayed contempt proceedings against Gujarat High Court Advocate Association President Yatin Narendra Oza by the Gujarat High Court. The contempt proceedings was initiated against him for circulating defamatory materials against a sitting Judge of the High court and for holding meetings of the association for discussing the scandalizing letter.
Unsuccessful divorce proceedings won’t affect applications under DV Act
The Supreme Court held that unsuccessful divorce proceedings cannot adversely affect the maintainability of application filed under the Domestic Violence Act.
No TDS deductible on tips received by Hotel employees
The Supreme Court categorically held that ‘tips’ received by Hotel employees does not amount to ‘salary’ from their employer and hence the employer need not deduct the tax at source under Section 192 of the Income Tax Act, though the same would be chargeable in the hands of the employees as“income from other sources”.
Protection of ‘sanction’ to Govt. servants cannot be camouflaged to commit crime
The Supreme Court summarized the principles governing requirement of sanction to prosecute Government servants and held that the offence committed by the Government servants must be directly and reasonably connected with official duty to require sanction. The Court also observed that Protection of sanction, which is an assurance to an honest and sincere officer to perform his duty honestly and to the best of his ability to further public duty, cannot be camouflaged by them to commit crime.
Reservation for differently able on the basis of total vacancies of the cadre
The Supreme Court reiterated that reservation for differently abled persons will have to be computed on the basis of total vacancies of the cadre and not on the basis of the vacancies available in the identified post.
Uttarakhand: SC says stay on HC order to continue
In a setback to the ousted Harish Rawat government, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said the stay on the Uttarakhand High Court order on President’s rule in Uttarakhand would continue.
Ministry of External Affairs slammed for giving misleading information on its Website
Supreme Court of India on Thursday said that it is extremely unfortunate that the official website of the Ministry of External Affairs gives misleading information not only to Indians but also to the world at large. The observation came in the Judgment of Supreme Court which dismissed a Plea filed by Marie-Emmanuelle Verhoeven a French Woman challenging her Extradition to Chili for her alleged involvement in a conspiracy to kill Senator Jaime Guzman Errazuriz on April 1, 1991.
Declaration as to validity of marriage and matrimonial status is within exclusive Jurisdiction of Family court
A Division Bench set aside Chattisgarh High Court judgment which had held that a negative declaration with respect to matrimonial status was outside the jurisdiction of the Family Court.
Order dismissing suit on ground of Res Judicata to be a decree
The Supreme Court in RISHABH CHAND JAIN& ANOTHER VS. GINESH CHANDRA JAINhas held that an order dismissing the suit on the ground of Res Judicata does not cease to be a decree on account of a procedural irregularity of non-framing an issue. Apex Court bench comprising of Justices Kurian Joseph and R.F. Nariman held that, such orders cannot be assailed in Revision, but only by preferring Appeal under section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
A person can change his religion and faith but not the caste to which he belongs
The Supreme Court upheld election of Mr. Mohammed Sadique from a constituency reserved for Scheduled Castes in Punjab by setting aside the High Court judgment which had invalidated the same. Dismissing the Election petition which was allowed by the High Court, the Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C. Pant has reiterated that a person can change his religion and faith but not the caste, to which he belongs, as caste has linkage to birth
SC refuses to allow IPL matches in drought hit Maharashtra in May
The appeal filed by Maharashtra Cricket Association against Bombay High Court order directing the BCCI to shift all the IPL matches scheduled after 30th April to venues outside Maharashtra, did not bear fruit as the Supreme Court refused to interfere.
Article 142 invoked to waive cooling period in a mutual consent divorce plea
Invoking Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do ‘complete justice’ to a couple who had decided to part with each other after living separately for last five years, the Supreme Court waived statutory cool-off period of six months and granted them divorce.
Senator Murder; French Woman’s Plea against her Extradition to Chili rejected
Supreme Court of India on Thursday rejected the Plea of a French Woman challenging her Extradition to Chili for her alleged involvement in a conspiracy to kill Senator Jaime Guzman Errazuriz on April 1, 1991. A two Judge Bench dismissed the Writ Petition filed by Marie-Emmanuelle Verhoeven holding that there is a valid and binding extradition treaty between India and Chile.
Registrar of Cooperative Societies has no jurisdiction to decide on tenability of suit against societies
The Supreme Court held that Registrar of Cooperative Societies has no jurisdiction to decide whether the suit is tenable for want of notice or not. The Apex Court Bench observed that that a question whether a suit is tenable under Section 167 of the Co-operative Societies Act for want of notice under the said provision is a question within the exclusive competence of a Civil Court.
On Block Assessment limitation
Supreme Court held that an operative period of interim stay order by the High Court which affects passing of Assessment Order by the Assessment Officer is also to be excluded for purpose of computing Limitation Period under Section 158BE(2) of Income Tax Act.
AG view on challenge against Aadhar as Money Bill sought
The Supreme Court on Monday sought the view of Attorney General MukulRohatgi on a petition filed by Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh challenging the decision to treat Aadhaar bill as a money bill, which was passed during Budget session in March 2016, overruling amendments moved in the Rajya Sabha.
Mah Govt flayed on Dance bar issue
The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up the Maharashtra government for not granting licenses to dance bars citing non-compliance of certain weird conditions and observed that it is better for women to perform then begging on streets or doing something unacceptable for earning livelihood.
Sabarimala women entry hearing continues
The Supreme Court bench hearing the contentious Sabarimala entry case on Monday asked several pointed questions to the temple management –Devaswom Board– when it said that the ban on entry of females aged between 10 and 50 years was because they cannot maintain purity for 41 days on account of menstruation
Ashish Nandy’s apology recorded
A Supreme Court bench recorded on 25 April, the apology tendered by AshisNandy, and with the consent of the parties, quashed the FIR filed by the Gujarat Government against him at Satellite Police Station, Ahmedabad.
Vijay Mallya cannot claim immunity
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sternly told business tycoon Vijay Mallya that he cannot claim immunity from disclosure of his assets and those of his family in India and abroad to consortium of banks on the ground that he was a Non Resident Indian since 1988