The Karnataka High Court has allowed the Union’s writ appeal over 3 acres 12 guntas at Sonnappanahalli near the Air Force Station, Yelahanka, holding that the Military Land Register is conclusive proof of Defence title and that a private buyer through a court-executed sale deed acquired no better title, and has restored the revenue orders in favour of the Defence Department.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL for a separate Gujjar Regiment in the Indian Army, emphasizing equal recruitment policies without caste distinctions. The judges criticized the demand as unconstitutional, reaffirming the Army’s commitment to national unity through integrated regiments. The petitioner withdrew the case after the court’s observations.
Today, On 30th July, The Supreme Court criticized the Centre for delays in addressing pension discrepancies for retired Army captains under the OROP scheme, imposing a Rs 2 lakh fine and setting a final deadline of November 14. If missed, a 10% pension increase will be enforced. The court scheduled the next hearing for November 25.
![[Mon Killings Case] SC Issues Notice to Defence Ministry on Nagaland's Plea to Prosecute 30 Army Personnel](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-2024-07-17T152750.747.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Yesterday, On 16th July, The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, issued a notice to the Defence Ministry in response to Nagaland’s plea to prosecute 30 Army personnel involved in the Mon killings. This comes after the Central government denied prosecution sanction under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The incident, which sparked public outcry, occurred during a flawed military operation in December 2021.
Yesterday, On 2nd July,The Madras High Court prohibited lawyers from using honorary titles like “Lieutenant Colonel” in legal documents, emphasizing equality in the eyes of the court. Justices SM Subramaniam and C Kumarappan’s ruling aligns with Supreme Court guidelines, ensuring legal practitioners are equal before the law, regardless of external titles. This decision upholds the integrity and equality of the legal profession.