GPA holders urge Ban to protect their right to livelihood

New Delhi

| Thursday, Oct 30 2008 IST

More than 15 lakh people in the Capital who have bought houses on a General Power of Attorney (GPA) basis today urged visiting United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to protect their rights which are being violated by the government due to its discriminatory polices regarding the purchase of property.

GPA is a mode of buying property by circumventing the mandatory official registration norms by which a buyer cannot be an official owner of the property.

According to Mr V N Bali, Convenor of the GPA holders association, people would have to buy property through GPA because there is no provision of open sale and purchase.

Mr Bali said attorney holders living in the co-operative societies have no rights in the affairs of the society even though they constitute 90 per cent of the residents of the society.

Section 94 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act which was introduced in the Capital in 2003 stands implemented from 1986 making it mandatory for the co-operative housing societies to wind up its management. According to the act, all the residents should be treated on a par but the Government has not implemented this so far.

Meanwhile, housing societies have handed over essential services to MCD.

The practice being followed now is that the new entrant to a society has to buy property on a GPA basis, pay Rs 50,000 or more to the society as entrance fees. Despite this the entrant cannot enjoy any right of managing the affairs as he cannot participate in the elections of the society. Only 10 per cent original members run the society and pocket the entire booty with the help of the registrar of societies' office employees, Mr Bali alleged.

Strongly condemning the discriminatory procedures adopted against the GPA holders, Mr Bali urged the UN Secretary-General to restore their Rights which are being violated by the Government.

A bonanza for power of attorney holders

The Hindu- Online edition of India's National Newspaper

Staff Reporter New Delhi Tuesday, Jan 02, 2007

They can now become active members of housing society

NEW DELHI: In a New Year bonanza for lakhs of people living in the Capital's flats or apartments in cooperative group housing societies with General Power of Attorney (GPA) ownership, the office of the Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi has given its nod to the notification that allows GPA holders to become active members of the society with voting rights.

Under the provision, which has now come into force, the fee for getting membership of a society has also been reduced from Rs.5,000 to Rs.500 per member.

It was at November-end that the Delhi Government had in an attempt to bring about financial accountability and check arbitrary functioning of the societies provided for these provisions in the Delhi Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Bill 2006 which was subsequently passed by the Delhi Assembly.

The amendment also stated that any society that had not held audit of its accounts or had failed to convene the meeting of the general body for five years in a row would face dissolution under the law. "Provided that in the case of a cooperative society which has not conducted audit or annual general body meeting for five consecutive years or has no fixed assets and outside liabilities excluding share money of the members, such society shall be deemed to have been dissolved and shall cease to exist as a cooperative body after the expiry of the said period of five years," the amendment stated.

Defunct society

Similarly the amendment made it very clear that if the cooperative society was dissolved or had become defunct, its representatives would not have voting rights in the affairs of the society or its financial banking.

Through the Amendment, Delhi Development Minister Raj Kumar Chauhan had stated: "We have tried to simplify matters and make acquisition of membership for the GPA holders very easy with nominal charges. In a majority of the societies, the original members have either sold their premises or migrated to some other place but continue to be active members while the GPA members despite being in majority do not have any voting right. This amendment will undo this wrong of the past and things are likely to work smoothly."

With the notification, the Delhi Government's decision to lower the membership fee for the GPA holders to become regular members of the society has also come into effect. Now they will have to pay only Rs. 500 (as against Rs. 5,000 earlier) as fee.

Transfer fee

On this issue, the amendment stated: "The purchaser having registered GPA or registered agreement for sale or registered sale deed as the case may be, in respect of such a plot or flat, may apply for membership by paying transfer fee of Rs. 500 and share money and admission fee as per the provisions of the by-laws of the society and the committee shall grant membership to the applicant within 30 days after the submission of his application. In case of refusal by the committee, the applicant may appeal to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies within 30 days and his decision shall be final."

Revised Taxi Fares (Effective from 06/06/2007)
The fares chargeable by the operators of the taxi in national Capital Territory of delhi shall be as under:-
Taxis(Black & Yellow Top)	Rs.15/- for first Kilometer (upon downing the meter) and thereafter Rs.8.50/- per Kilometer for every additional Kilometers
Night Charges	25% of the Fare(11.00PM to 5.00 AM)
Waiting Charges	Rs.25 per hour or part thereof (subject to minimum of 15 min stay)
Luggage	Rs.10/- per piece except for shopping bags or a small attaché case

Revised Auto Rickshaw Fares (Effective from 06/06/2007)
The fares chargeable by the operators of the auto-rickshaws in national Capital Territory of delhi shall be as under:-
Auto-Rickshaw	Rs.10 for first Kilometer (upon downing the meter) and thereafter Rs.4.50 per Kilometer for every additional Kilometers
Night Charges	25% of the Fare(11.00PM to 5.00 AM)
Waiting Charges	Rs.25 per hour or part thereof (subject to minimum of 15 min stay)
Luggage	Rs.5 per piece except for shopping bags or a small attaché case

Registration of Documents

Q. Which documents need to be registered ?

Certain documents are required to be registered compulsorily for example Sale/Title Deed, Conveyance Deed,

Lease Deed, Gift Deed,Agreement to Sale etc.There are certain other documents which could also be registered optionally. These are Will Adoption deed, General Power of Attorney,Special Power of Attorney,Trust Deed,Partnership deed,Cancellation of SPA,GPA or will etc . Q. Where do I have to go and during which hours? To the office of Sub-Registration Magistrate in whose jurisdiction the property is located, during 9.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on any working day. Click Here to obtain the contact address of the SDM in whose jurisdiction in your colony lies. Q. Which papers/documents/fees, do I take with me? Document required to be registered ( in duplicate) Two Passport size photographs of both parties. Two witnesses. Proof of identification of each party and witnesses i.e. election Identity Card, Passport, identity Card issued by Govt. of India, Semi govt. and Autonomous bodies or identification by a Gazetted officer. In case the property is/was under a lease from D.D.A., L&DO, M.C.D., Industries Department, Labour Department of Delhi Govt. etc., permission of lessor for registration of the document. No objection Certificate under section 8 of Delhi Land (Restriction and Transfer) Act, 1972 from Tehsildar of the Sub Division of the District to the effect that the property is not under acquisition. Income Tax clearance Certificate in prescribed proforma 34A, under section 230 of Income Tax Act, from concerned Income Tax Officer where the transaction exceeds Rs.5,00,000/- Permission from the Appropriate Authority in the prescribed proforma 37 I, where the transaction exceeds Rs.50,00,000/- under the provisions contained in section 269 of Income Tax Act, 1961. Q. What will be the criteria used while deciding my case? The document is submitted to the Reader for scrutiny. After scrutiny, the Reader indicates the Registration fee required, on the document itself. The due registration fee is to be deposited with the Cashier against a receipt. After depositing the fees, the documents are required to be presented before the Sub-Registrar by the parties in accordance with Section 32 of the Registration Act, 1908. Presentation As per Section 32 of the Registration Act, 1908 every document to be registered under the Act shall be presented at the registration-office :- by some person executing or claiming under the same, or, in the case of a copy of a decree or order, claiming under the decree or order, or by the representative or assign or such a person, or by the agent of such a person, representative or assign, duly authorized by power-of-attorney and authenticated in manner hereinafter mentioned. As per Section 33 of the Act, for the purpose of section 32, the following powers-of-attorney shall alone be recognized:- if the principal at the time of executing the power-of-attorney resides in any part of India in which the Act is in force, a power-of-attorney executed before and authenticated by the Registrar or Sub-Registrar within whose district or sub-district the principal resides; if the principal at the time aforesaid (resides in any part of India in which this Act is not in force), a power –of-attorney executed before and authenticated by any magistrate; if the principal at the time aforesaid does not reside in India, a power-of-attorney executed before and authenticated by a Notary Public, or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, (Indian) consul or Vice-Consul, or representative of the Central government. Provided that the following persons shall not be required to attend at any registration-office or Court for the purpose of executing any such power-of-attorney as is mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of this section, namely:- persons who by reason of bodily infirmity are unable without risk or serious inconvenience so to attend; persons who are in jail under civil or criminal process; persons exempt by law from personal appearance in court. Endorsements are made under Section 52, 58 and 60 of the Registration Act on the document after completion of formalities before Sub-Registrar. The delivery of document is made on the production of the receipt issued by the cashier in respect of the document at the time of presentation. Q. When will I get a response? You should be getting a response normally within 15 days.

Legal Maxims

Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea The act does not make one guilty unless there be a criminal intent.

Actus non reum facit, nisi mens sit rea. An act does not make a person guilty, unless the intention be also guilty. This maxim applies only to criminal cases; in civil matters it is otherwise

Actus reus A ad finem at the end Ad hoc For this purpose Ad infinitum Forever, without limit, to infinity. ad litem appointed for a lawsuit Ad perpetuam rei memoriam For a perpetual memorial of the matter. ad personam personal guilty deed or act. Alibi At another place, elsewhere. Amicus curiae A friend of the Court . Audi alteram partem Hear the other side. Causa proxima, non remota spectatur The immediate, and not the remote cause is to be considered. Caveat emptor. Let the purchaser beware. Caveat venditor Let the seller beware. Consensus ad idem Agreement as to the same things. Damnum sine injuria damage without legal injury. de minimis trivial De minimis lex non curat The law does not notice trifling matters. De minimis non curat lex. The law does not notice or care for trifling matters. nemo dat quod non habet one can give a better title than the one he has Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa No one can be judge in his own case. Ubi jus ibi remedium est Where there is a right there is a remedy. Ubi jus, ibi remedium. Where there is a right, there is a remedy.

HOW TO GET INFORMATION ON CONSUMER COURT THROUGH RTI APPLICATION

DETAILS UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

OFFICERS TO WHOM APPLICATION CAN BE SENT or PERSONALLY DELIVERED:

Officials	Designation	Tel. No.
Shri B. V. Sharma	Appellate Authority	23760107
Shri H. D. Nautiyal	Public Information Officer	23358074
Shri Iqbal Ahmed	Assistant Public Information Officer	23712459

Where to send / deliver RTI application:

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

7^th Floor, ‘B’ Wing, Janpath Bhawan

Janpath New Delhi – 110 001

Working Hours: Monday to Friday from 9.00 a.m. to 05.30 p.m.

Holidays :All Central Government Holidays.

Time Frame: National Commission based information will be supplied within 30 days.

Fees: Application Fee Rs. 10/-

Photocopy Rs. 2/- per page

Inspection of record: No fee for one hour. Thereafter, Rs. 5/- for each 15 minutes.

Diskette or Floppy Rs. 50/-each

Mode of Payment of fee: The Draft/Postal Order towards the fee should be in favour of ‘The Pay & Account Officer, Ministry of Consumer Affairs’ and payable at New Delhi )

Sample RTI application:

Application for obtaining information under

The Right to Information Act 2005

To:

Shri Iqbal Ahmed

Assistant Public Information Officer,

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

7^th Floor, ‘B’ Wing, Janpath Bhawan

Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001

1. FULL NAME OF APPLICANT : Mr. XYZ

2. ADDRESS : write your residential address

3. PARTICULARS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED

(i) Subject matter of information :

Relating to limitation period.

(ii) Period to which the information relates :

1^st February 2009 to 28 February 2009.

(iii) Description of information required :

What is time limit for filing consumer complaint?

1)

(iv) Whether information is required by post or in person :

By Post.

(v) In case by post (Ordinary, Registered or Speed) :

By Ordinary post.

4. WHETHER THE APPLICANT IS BELOW POVERTY LINE :
(If yes, attach a photocopy of the proof thereof)

No. (Applicant is not below poverty line.)

Place : Delhi

Date : March, 2009 Signature of the applicant

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

What is MACT ?

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal MACT deals with matters related to compensation of motor accidents victims or their next of kin .The Tribunal deal with claims relating to loss of life/property and injury cases resulting from Motor Accidents.

MACT Courts are presided over by Judicial Officers from the State Higher Judicial Service. Now these Courts are under direct supervision of the Hon’ble High Court of the respective state

Who can report to MACT in case of accident ?

Victim himself or through Advocate,in the case of personal injury. Through advocate in case of minor applicant below the age of 18 years. Legal heirs themselves or through advocate in the case of death.The owner of the vehicle in the case of property damage.

What all documents should accompany the petition ?

1. Copy of the FIR registered in connection with said accident, if any.

2. Copy of the MLC/Post Mortem Report/Death Report as the case may be.

3. The documents of the identity of the claimants and of the deceased in a death case.

4. Original bills of expenses incurred on the treatment alongwith treatment record.

5. Documents of the educational qualifications of the deceased, if any.

6. Disability Certificate, if already obtained, in an injury case.

7. The proof of income of the deceased/injured.

8. Documents about the age of the victim.

9. The cover note of the third party insurance policy, if any.

10.An affidavit detailing the relationship of the claimants with the deceased.

Promotions can't be with retrospective effect: SC

Press Trust of India
Posted online: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 at 1440 hours IST


New Delhi, January 2: No retrospective effect can be given to an order of promotion, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Upholding an appeal filed by the Uttaranchal Government a Bench comprising Justices A R Lakshmanan and Altamas Kabir felt that granting promotions with retrospective effect was not only against certain rules but would also be unreasonable and against common parlance.

The Bench rejected the plea of the employee Dinesh Kumar Sharma, who claimed that he should be promoted from the date of vacancy and not from the date as decided upon by the selection panel.

Sharma, who was working as a Senior Chemical Assistant, Research (chemistry) Branch, Department of Agriculture in the Uttaranchal Government, was promoted to his next higher post in 1999.

It was claimed by Sharma that since the vacancy for the promoted post arose in 1995-1996, he was entitled for the promotion from the said year with all related benefits; a contention which was upheld by the High Court.

In its appeal before the apex court the State Government complained that the employee obtained a favourable order from the High Court after concealing the fact that his three representations to the appropriate authority for consideration of the retrospective promotion had already been rejected.

However, the apex court rejected the employee's contention and held that promotions cannot be made with retrospective effect and the right to constitute the selection committee against the vacancy is vested in the Government.

"This court has categorically held that seniority must be reckoned from the date of substantive appointment under the relevant rules and also that the right to frame rules for the determination of inter-se seniority is the prerogative of the State," the Bench observed.

The Bench further observed that the High Court took an erroneous view of the dispute and committed an error by directing the State Government to promote the employee with retrospective effect.

Accordingly, the Bench set aside the High Court order and upheld the Government's contention that the promotion would be effective only from the date from which the employee was actually promoted.

Probate of Will

Probate means copy of the will certified under the seal of a court of a competent jurisdiction. Probate of a will when granted establishes the Will from the death of the testator and renders valid all intermediate acts of the executor as such. It is conclusive evidence of the validity and due execution of the will and of the testamentary capacity of the testator.

A probate differs from succession certificate. A probate is issued by the court, when a person dies testate i.e. having made a will and the executor or beneficiary applies to the court for grant of probate. in case a person has not made a will his legal heirs will have to apply to the court for grant of a succession certificate which will be given as per applicable laws of inheritance.

To who can a probate be granted

Probate can be granted only to the executor appointed by the will. The appointment may be express or implied by necessary implication.

It cannot be grated to any person who is a minor or is of unsound mind, nor to any association of individuals unless it is a company satisfies the conditions prescribed by the rules made by the State Government.

Reservation in fraction? When in doubt, round off

NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 6: When reservation permissible is 7.5 per cent , how many seats out of 100 should be allotted to the reserved category — 7 or 8? This was the question before the Delhi High Court in a recent petition filed by a student, who challenged the admission policy of the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University to allot only seven seats for STs for the 2006-07 MBBS course.
Drawing on law and simple mathematics, Justice Anil Kumar of the HC answered the “puzzle” thus: “If the reservation is in fraction, then how it should be considered, this has to be based on logic and common sense. Applying the principle of rounding off of mathematics which is, if part is one half or more, its value should be increased to one and if part less than half then its value should be ignored.”
Applying the reasoning to the facts of the case, the court further said “the inevitable inference in these facts and circumstances on the reasons as detailed herein is that for 7.5 per cent reservation for STs, the Government should have allocated eight seats. The respondents (University) have rather allocated only seven seats and therefore the respondents are liable to allocate one more seat for ST quota.”

The petitioner, Madan Mohan had taken the Combined Entrance Test for MBBS, 2006 and was ranked 6250 in the merit list. He, however, claimed to have fallen just short of a place in the admitted list as the University had allotted only seven seats for the ST pool complying with the requirement to set apart 7.5 per cent seats to the community. For 7.5 per cent reserved seats, the University could not allocate seven seats only as for half fraction or more, a full seat ought to have been allocated, Mohan insisted.
On behalf of the Union, it was submitted that two of the 100 seats were earmarked for citizens of Maldives, leaving only 98 seats. The mandated 7.5 per cent quota against 98 would be 7.35, which on rounding off would leave the scope for only seven seats, the Government contended. Brushing aside the argument, the HC referred to a decision of the Supreme Court that had adopted the rounding off rule in UPSC examinations and said the plea that the 7.5 per cent had to be calculated from 98 seats was not acceptable.

How are service benefits like salary, promotions and rank within the organization protected?

Mandatory Reservations

• Ratheesh Babu vs. UGC
• Dilip Baruah vs. State of Assam and Ors
• R Manoj Kumar vs. University of Hyderabad Rep by its Registrar
• Dalbir Singh Bagga vs. State of Punjab and Ors
• Ram Sevak Tripathi vs. U.P. Public Service Commission and Ors
• Vinod Kumar Rai vs. Public service Commission, Allahabad
• Daya Ram Tripathi vs. State of U.P. and another
• Nanjala Bayamma vs. Revenue Divisional Officer and Anr
• Jaswant Singh vs. State of Haryana and Another
• Anjali Arora vs. National Thermal Power Corporation

Reservation only for those who do not Qualify on Merit

• All India Confederation Of The Blind vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
• Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors vs. All India Confederation of the Blind

Acceptable Qualifications

• Bharat Lal Meena vs. Govt of NCT of Delhi

Definition of the Term "During Service"

• SK Maulana vs. APSRTC
• DTC vs. Rajbir Singh
• Union of India & Ors vs. Mohd Mobin Khan & Anr
• Satyabir Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &Anr

Definition of Reinstatement

• Rajbir Singh vs. AJS Sawhney

Reinstatement when Disability is Acquired During Service

• Md Jani Miya vs. APSRTC
• KV Ranga Reddy vs. DIG Border Security Force
• Dharambir vs. DTC
• Ramphal vs. DTC
• KJ Dhulia vs. State of Gujarat
• Baljeet Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• DTC vs. Balram Sharma
• Sulochana vs. APSRTC, Hyd and Another
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Rajbir Singh and Sadh Ram
• Syed Sha Musebulla Alvi vs. Secretary, General Administrative Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
• APSRTC vs. M V Ramana Rao
• Metropolitan Transport Corporation vs. the Presiding officer, Principal Labour Court
• Ravichandran vs. Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd
• University of Rajasthan vs. Surendra Kumar Goel
• A John Peter vs. Manager, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation
• Virender Kumar Gupta vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Hari Om Singh vs. Union of India and Ors
• Virender Kumar Gupta vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Kunal Singh vs. Union of India
• Sadh Ram vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• LIC vs. Chief Commissioner for disabilities, Harish Chander Dabral and Dr.Uma Tuli, Managing Director, Amar Jyoti Trust
• Shri Sunil Kumar vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Anand Bihari & others vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur & anr
• Krishan Chander and PO Bhainswal Kalan vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation vs. Gopal Motambhaia Patel
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Ganpat Singh
• S. Rajendran vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime and Traffic and the Commissioner of Police
• J. Benjamin vs. the Management of Bharat Earth Movers Limited, Kolar Gold Field
• Narain Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr
• Mohd Yasin Ansari, Gyanendra Singh, Inder Deo, Ishu Narayan, Anil Singh and Hasib Ahmed Islam vs. Union of India and Ors
• Shri Jagdish Prasad vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & the Depot Manager
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Sh. Himmat Singh and Others

Compensation does not bar Claim for Reinstatement

• Kuldeep Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Rajamani vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. Rep. by its General Manager

Reinstatement in Special Circumstances

• Dr Kanshi Ram Anand vs. the State of U.P. and another

Posthumous Reinstatement

• Mahipal Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr

Payment of Minimum Wages

• Delhi Administration through Directorate of Social Welfare vs. Presiding Officer

Pay scale once fixed cannot be altered

• Delhi Transport Corporation through Regional Manager vs. Ishwar Singh, Batch No. 15664 S/o Shri Dalip Singh, The Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal –I and The Government of NCT of Delhi through the Secretary Labour and Human Welfare Ministry
• Union of India & Others vs. Hari Ram Shukla & Others

Scope of Government Organizations under Purview of the PWD Act

• MV Ramana Rao vs. APSRTC

Special Concessions

• R. Govindarajan vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd
• V.K. Bhasin vs. State Bank of Patiala and Ors
• Rakesh Kumar vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences & Others
• Sunil Raosaheb Narke vs. Air India and Anr
• Vikram Trisal vs. Union of India and Ors
• Sandhya Jain, Rajana Purwar, Satyendra Pal Singh, Smt.Anjana Mishra (Dixit), Jyotsana Bhatnagar vs. State of U.P & Others
• Irrigation Development Employees Association & Ors vs. Government of A.P. & Ors
• T. Raja Rama Mohan Rao vs. Income-tax Officer
• Shri Suresh Kumar Tiwari vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• D. Saibaba vs. Bar Council of India

Instances when Compassionate Employment is Granted

• Uppala Venkat vs. Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Central Railway, Secunderabad and Others

Employment to a Family Member only if Declared ‘Disabled’

• Lal Chand vs. State of Haryana and others

Reduction of Posts only with Valid Reason

• Shruti Kalra vs University of Delhi

Creation of a Supernumerary Post

• Lance Naik Vinod Kumar vs. Union of India
• K Kamatchi vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madhurai (Division IV) Ltd. and the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pvt, Kumbam Branch
• L. Loganathan vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Express State Corporation and the General Manager (Amdn), Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corporation

Continuation of Service till the age of Superannuation

• Tarlochan Singh Aujla vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Rama vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors
• Shivaji S/o Vishwanath Dongre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors

Instances when Special Compensations are Granted

• Rajanna vs. Union of India

Non Discrimination in Service

• Pradeep Jagannath Talekar and Others vs. Union of India and Ors
• Nand Kumar Jivan Dalvi vs. Union of India through the Director General, ESIC, New Delhi and Anr
• Jai Shankar Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Others
• Orissa Association for the Blind and others vs. State of Orissa and others
• Ghanakeshi Sahu vs. Director, Elementary Education, Orissa
• Smt Omvati Kalshan vs. Delhi Development Authority

Government Appointments subject to State Rules

• Binu vs. State of Kerala

Alternative Employment on Acquiring Disability

• O.P. Sharma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr
• Md. Sukur Miya and Anr. vs. Singareni Collieries Company Limited and Ors.
• P. Thangamarimuthu vs. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Madurai (Division-1) Ltd., through its Managing Director
• Zammel Ahmed vs. Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. and Ors
• Rajinder Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation vs. Hanitsinh Thakubha Parmar
• E. Subramani vs. the General Manager, (Administration) Puratchi Thalaivar MGR Transport Corporation
• Shree Satish Prabhakar Padhye vs. Union of India (UOI) through the Secretary Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs (Legislative Department) and Ors
• Vijender Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• L.Loganathan vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corporation and the General Manager (Admn), Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corpn

Pay Scale to be protected in Alternative Employment

• Narendra Kumar Chandla vs. State of Haryana and Ors
• Satya Prakash Meena vs. Union of India through General Manager, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai and Anr
• P.Pardhasarthy vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• K. Satyanandam, Peon vs. Chairman, Ministry of Railways and Ors.

Provide Compensation or give Alternative Jobs

• Rameshwar Dass and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others
• Jaswant Singh and another vs. State of Punjab

Matters related to Promotion

• Union of India and Others vs. Hari Ram Shukla and Others
• M. Krishna Das vs. the Chairman, Railway Board and Ors

Matters Related to the Teaching Staff of Special Institutions

• Surekha d/o Nagorao Pawar (Kumari) and Ors vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors

Statutory Authority to Exercise Impartial Discretion in Retrenchment

• U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and another vs. Mohd Ismail and others

Follow Procedure for Termination

• Captain Virendra Kumar vs. Union of India

Entitlement to Earned Leave on Acquiring Disability during Service

• Devki Nandan (Dr.) vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors

Implementing Reservation

• Sayed Dasthagiri Pasha vs. Osmania University, rep. by its Registrar
• State of Rajasthan and Anr vs. Shiv Kumar Singh

Directions to Seek Relief under the Act

• N. Siva Kumar vs. APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and Others

How are the provisions of the PWD Act interpreted?

Three percent Reservation to be Equally Distributed

• Perambaduru Murali Krishna and Ors vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors

Exemption from the Act to be Notified

• RK Arora vs. Union of India

Three percent reservation does not include Merit Qualifiers

• All India Confederation Of The Blind vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Applicability of the Provisions of the Act

• UOI through G.M. Western Railway vs. Sanjay Kumar Jain
• Union of India vs. Sanjay Kumar Jain

How are employment opportunities for the disabled created and protected?

Special privileges to be accorded to the Disabled

• Shri Niaz Ahmad vs. Union of India & Others

Vacancies for Reserved Categories to be duly filled up

• Anthosh Kumar Panigrahi vs. P. Narayanan, Chief General Manager, HRMD Nabard and Ors

Identify Posts for Reservation

• Dr. Honey Arya vs. Punjab University
• Ray John Varghese vs. State of Kerala

Certain posts cannot be denied on ground of Disability

• Ramesh Chander vs. R.L. Chugh, P.O, Industrial Tribunal

What are the limitations of the Act?

Alternate Employment not Provided

• Nandkumar Narayanrao Ghodmare vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

All Charges to be Substantiated

• Capt. Rachpal Singh vs. Union of India
• Lt. Col. Jagannath Singh Pathania (Retd.) vs. Union of India (UOI) and Anr

Concessions Granted only when Disability is over Forty Percent

• Union of India and Others vs. KP Singh

Meet Basic Merit Requirements

• Prakash Chandra vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ors
• S.D. Sridhar vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• Smt. G. Mallicka vs. the Municipal Council and Ors.

Recruitment Rules Governing a Post must be Honored

• The Joint Commissioner of Customs (Personnel and Vigilance, representing Union of India (UOI) and the Deputy Commissioner of Custom (P and V) vs. Smt. T.E. Radha, Sundaraj Gugan, Examiner and the Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench
• Sarika vs. State of U.P and Ors

Reservation in Certain Services not to exceed 50 percent of total posts

• State of U.P and Anr vs. Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors

Sub Categorization in Disability Category not Allowed

• K.V. Ramana vs. the Director, O/o Director General of Audit (Defence Services) and Ors

Claim for Employment on Compassionate Grounds, to be made within a Specified Time

• G. Mallikharjuna Rao vs. District and Sessions Judge, Nellore and another

Section 47 not applicable to Private Bodies

• Hem Chand vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors

Decision of Stipulated Body Final in Judiciary Transfers

• Registrar General of High Court and Anr vs. Chitra Biswas and Ors

UGC Decision Cannot be Interfered with in Certain Matters

• All India Confederation of the Blind vs. Union of India and Anr

What are the limitations to the privileges accorded to the disabled?

Equality before Law

• Srikrishan Gupta vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors

What conditions must be satisfied before a Writ Petition is filed?

Legal Procedures to be Followed

• Rajesh Kumar vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Ors
• The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai Division IV) Ltd. vs. P. Ellappan
• Pushpa Kumari and Ors vs. GAIL (India) and Anr

Reservation in Certain Services not to exceed 50 percent of total posts

State of U.P and Anr vs. Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors

Filed under: Uttar Pradesh Public Service (Reservation for Physically Handicapped Dependants of Freedom Fighters
and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993
Uttar Pradesh Public Service (Reservation for Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backwards Classes) Act, 1994
Appellant: State of U.P and Anr
Respondent: Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors
Citation: AIR2005SC658, 2005 (1) AWC 363 (SC), 2005(1)ESC96, [2005(1)JCR147(SC], 2005(1)JKJ [SC], JT2005(1)SC150,2005(2) SLJ 386 (SC), (2005)2 UPLBEC1285
Court: In the Supreme Court of India
Judges: R.C. Lahoti, G.P. Mathur and A.K. Mathur

Facts

In the year 1997, the State Public Service Commission, pursuant to the requisition made by the State Government on the advice of the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, advertised 93 posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division) in the Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service.

Keeping in view the provisions for reservation, mandated by the U.P. Public Service (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Departments of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act 1993 and U.P. Public Service (Reservations for Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other backward Classes) Act 1994, certain posts were reserved.

To the extent of the percentage of reservation, as contemplated by the two Acts mentioned above, there was no controversy. However, a controversy arose on the application of the percentage as against the total number of posts. Pawan Kumar Tiwari belonged to general category. 46 selected candidates in the general category were appointed. There were 3 candidates in the waiting list.

He was at the top of the waiting list but was denied appointment. Aggrieved he filed a Writ Petition in the High Court which was allowed directing the State of U.P. to issue a letter of appointment to him. The State then filed this appeal against the order of the High Court.

Observations of the Court

The Court examined the rule of rounding off the reservation percentage, according to which if the decimal part was one-half or more, its value would be increased to one and if it was less than half then its value would be ignored. Therefore, 46.50 should have been rounded off to 47 and not to 46 as has been done.

If 47 candidates would have been considered for selection in the general category, Pawan was sure to find a place in the list of selected meritorious candidates and hence entitled to appointment. Moreover the total number of vacancies was 93 and consequent upon the allocation of reservation and calculation done by the State, the number of reserved seats would be 47, leaving only 46 available for general category candidates.

Meaning thereby, the reservation would exceed 50% which would be unconstitutional. It was stated that the total number of reserved seats could not exceed 46 out of 93. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Public interest litigation

Public interest litigation

"Public interest Litigation", in simple words, means, litigation filed in a court of law, for the protection of "Public Interest", such as pollution, Terrorism, Road safety, constructional hazards etc.

Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or in any act. It has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent of public at large. Although, the main and only focus of such litigation is only "Public Interest" there are various areas where a Public Interest Litigation can be filed. For e.g.

• Violation of basic human rights of the poor

• Content or conduct of government policy

• Compel municipal authorities to perform a public duty.

• Violation of religious rights or other basic fundamental rights.

When can a public interest litigation be filed?

A public interest litigation can be filed only in a case where "Public Interest" at large is effected. Merely because, only one person is effected by state inaction is not a ground for Public interest litigation

These are some of the possible areas where a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION can be filed.

• Where a factory / industrial unit is causing air pollution, and people nearly are getting effected.

• Where, in an area / street there are no street lights, causing inconvenience to commuters

• .Where some "Banquet Hall" plays a loud music, in night causing noise pollution.

• Where some construction company is cutting down trees, causing environmental pollution.

• Where poor people, are affected, because of state government's arbitrary decision to impose heavy "tax".

• For directing the police / Jail authorities to take appropriate decisions in regards to jail reforms, such as segregation of convicts, delay in trial, production of under trial before the court on remand dates.

• For abolishing child labor, and bonded labor.

• Where rights of working women are affected by sexual harassment.

• For keeping a check on corruption and crime involving holders of high political officer.

• For maintaining Roads, Sewer etc in good conditions.

• For removal of Big Hoarding and signboard from the busy road to avoid traffic problem.

• Recently a Public Interest Litigation has been filed, for directing the "Delhi Traffic Police" to stop the method of sending challans to address by post, as it is being misused.

Loan recovery firm manager held

The Crime Branch on Wednesday arrested the manager of a recovery agency, along with two agents, for harassing a doctor living in Sarita Vihar. The doctor who was harassed reportedly did not even take a loan.

The police said the accused wanted to recover the loan amount from someone else in the area. When they did not find the person they were looking for, they went to the complainant's residence, who lived few blocks away, and threatened him with dire consequences and asked him to repay the loan amount.

The incident took place on Sunday at the Sarita Vihar residence of Dr S.S. Chahar, a senior government functionary. The police arrested the three accused — Nazir Hussain (22), Mahender Singh (22) and Vikas Mete, the agency manager.

Hussain, one of the accused had gone to look for one Surender Singh, a resident of Sarita Vihar. “When he did not find any person by the name of Surender Singh at the address concerned, he asked neighbours for any person living in the area with that name.

“The doctor’s initials matched with the name of the person he was looking for and he went to his house to seek the loan amount from him,” said Satyendra Garg, additional commissioner of police (crime).

The police said the three men were employed with Legal Eye, a Madangir-based recovery agency. They said the agency was working for a multinational bank and the men had gone to recover a loan amount of Rs 3.5 lakh.

The accused did not listen even when the doctor said he had not taken any loan. “The doctor approached us with through the helpline,” said Garg.

Banks not liable to pay interest on export subsidy: SC

The Supreme Court has held that banks are not liable to pay interest tax on subsidies they get from the RBI for giving concessional loans to exporters.

Dismissing an appeal filed by the income-tax department recently, a bench headed by Justice S H Kapadia has upheld the Delhi High Court judgement, which said that the compensatory interest received as subsidy by Punjab National Bank from the RBI for giving concessional loans to exporters did not amount to interest tax chargeable under the Interest Tax Act, 1979.

The RBI gives export subsidy to banks to make good their losses due to extending export credit at a lower rate of interest.

PNB had received export subsidy of more than Rs 9 lakh for assessment years 1985-87 under the Export Credit (Interest Subsidy) Scheme, 1968. The Assessing Officer had taxed it on the grounds that any amount received by way of export subsidy can only be regraded as such when it was directly paid to an exporter.

According to the department, the export subsidy PNB received was essentially in the nature of interest defined under Section 2(7) of the Act and hence is liable to be included in its income for paying tax.

Additional Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran argued that the money the bank received can be regraded as export subsidy in the hands of an assessee only when the latter directly engaged in exports and received the subsidy in the course of its export business.

"Since the assessee is a bank and not engaged in any export activity, but is essentially engaged in (the) banking business, nor has rececived the said sum from (the) RBI for utilisation of any export activity as an exporter, the same cannot be regarded or characterised as an export subsidy as to take out the same from the taxing net," the petition stated.