![[Paris Olympics 2024] "We Fought Hard, Vinesh Phogat Didn't Want to Challenge Sports Court's Verdict": Lawyer Harish Salve](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-2024-09-14T132033.217.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Senior lawyer Harish Salve revealed that Vinesh Phogat chose not to contest the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling, despite their efforts. Phogat was disqualified from the Paris Olympics for exceeding the weight limit and her appeal was denied. The Indian Olympic Association and Phogat’s legal team faced coordination issues. Phogat has since retired from wrestling and entered politics.
Vidushpat Singhania, representing the Indian Olympic Association, stated that the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) provided only a brief rejection of Vinesh Phogat’s appeal for her disqualification. The decision can be appealed to the Swiss Federal Tribunal within 30 days. Vinesh Phogat was disqualified from the Paris Olympics 2024 for exceeding the weight limit by 100 grams. Despite efforts to reduce her weight, she was unable to meet the criteria, leading to her disqualification and subsequent retirement from wrestling. Sarah Ann Hildebrandt won the gold medal in the women’s 50kg freestyle event.
![[Paris Olympics 2024] Vinesh Phogat Appeal for Silver Medal; CAS Appointed Dr Annabelle Bennett As Sole Arbitrator To Decide|| Adjudicate on Aug 11](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-39-2.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Vinesh Phogat has appealed her disqualification from the 2024 Paris Olympics, challenging the United World Wrestling’s decision. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) appointed Dr. Annabelle Bennett as the sole arbitrator. A hearing is scheduled for August 9, with a decision expected before the Olympic Games’ conclusion on August 11.
The Kerala High Court is considering a plea challenging a provision in the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999, which bars voters from filing petitions to disqualify elected local body members. The petitioner argues that this exclusion undermines political accountability and violates the right to equality under the Indian Constitution. The matter awaits further hearing.
The Allahabad High Court postponed the hearing on a PIL challenging Rahul Gandhi’s Lok Sabha election, citing a prior 2016 directive requiring advocate Asok Pande to submit a Rs.25,000 Demand Draft with any plea. The Court called for a compliance report and set the next hearing for July 1, crucial for determining further steps in the case. The PIL questions Gandhi’s eligibility to hold office due to alleged citizenship and conviction issues.
The Bombay High Court upheld an order by a divisional joint registrar of Cooperative Societies that barred a Mumbai resident from a suburban housing society from contesting managing committee elections due to having more than two children. Mumbai, Maharashtra: The Bombay High Court upheld an order by a divisional joint registrar of cooperative societies that […]
The Supreme Court on May 12th emphasized the autonomy of municipal elected members, preventing arbitrary removal by civil servants or political leaders. Justices declared that only post-election misconduct warrants removal, unless pre-election misconduct directly relates to the representative and was undetected during nomination. The ruling aims to prevent political or personal bias in decisions.
Six former MLAs from Himachal Pradesh are considering withdrawing their plea challenging their disqualification by the Supreme Court. They aim to participate in upcoming by-elections, as their disqualification stemmed from defying a party directive during a crucial Assembly vote. The Supreme Court had scheduled a hearing for their appeal on May 6.
Today (12th March):On March 18 (Monday), the Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the plea of six rebel Himachal Pradesh Congress leaders contesting the decision of the Assembly Speaker to disqualify them as Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs).
The decision, made by the Assembly Speaker under the anti-defection law, has sparked significant implications. The court proceedings are expected to address the constitutional crisis that arose from cross-voting during the Rajya Sabha election.
The Supreme Court’s ruling came as a response to an appeal challenging the disqualification of the panchayat member. The appellant argued against the disqualification, citing various reasons for the inability to procure the caste validity certificate within the designated period The Supreme Court of India has affirmed the disqualification of a panchayat member for failing […]
