The Supreme Court of India addressed petitions against the Telangana Speaker for delaying disqualification requests of defected BRS MLAs. Justice Gavai emphasized the court’s duty to oversee constitutional adherence, questioning the Speaker’s inaction. The court is set to continue hearings after hearing arguments concerning the Speaker’s timeline for decisions.
Today, On 1st April, The Supreme Court raised concerns over the absence of an Advocate-on-Record (AoR) in a case involving unethical legal practices, questioning the integrity of the profession. The court noted that some advocates, instead of upholding justice, resort to unfair means. When caught, they often evade accountability by offering an unconditional apology, claiming their actions were unintentional. This observation highlights the growing need for stricter enforcement of ethical standards in the legal system.
The Supreme Court ruled that Advocates-on-Record (AoRs) can mark appearances only for lawyers who actually appear and argue in a case. The Court emphasized that High Courts and District Courts follow a similar practice, disallowing multiple counsel from marking appearances. This reinforces the need for a structured and consistent approach in court proceedings. The ruling aims to maintain procedural discipline and avoid unnecessary representation.
Today, On 16th January, The Supreme Court dismissed a petition challenging Manan Kumar Mishra’s membership in the Rajya Sabha, where he serves as the Chairman of the Bar Council of India (BCI). The petition sought to disqualify Mishra, but the Court found no merit in the challenge and upheld his position. The decision reinforces Mishra’s eligibility to hold the seat in Parliament. The Court ruled in favor of dismissing the plea.
The Allahabad High Court instructed the Uttar Pradesh government to address the relocation request of the Hathras rape victim’s family for their safety. The court emphasized the urgency following delays since February 2024 and required a prompt response from the District Magistrate, with compliance to be assessed by January 2025.
The Uttarakhand government faced a legal loss in the Supreme Court over UPNL employees, as the court dismissed its Special Leave Petition, upholding a 2018 High Court ruling for “equal pay for equal work.” This decision impacts around 25,000 UPNL employees, reigniting hopes for fair wages and employment regulation.
Today, On 15th October, the Supreme Court ruled that a benchmark disability alone cannot disqualify individuals from pursuing medical education. Candidates can only be barred if deemed incapable by a disability assessment board. The decision emphasized the need for specific reasons for eligibility rulings and encouraged the National Medical Commission to ensure inclusive practices.
The Supreme Court scolded the West Bengal government for challenging an undertrial’s bail after four previous rejections, warning against further provocations. The accused, Rajdeep Roy, had been in custody for over three years for alleged misappropriation of rice worth Rs. 3 crore. The Court ultimately dismissed the state’s appeal, emphasizing the importance of respecting personal liberty in judicial processes.
The Supreme Court cautioned the Registrar to ensure diligence among assistants, due to a missing order and critical report in a case file. Despite the registrar’s conclusion, the court noted the absence of an official report and directed the Registry to submit a report within a week, setting the case for re-listing in ten days.
![[UPNL Employees Case] Major Defeat to Uttarakhand Govt. as SC Dismissed SLP](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/image-13-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
