DOCSLIB.ORG

RULE 4(E) (I) of the BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RULE 4(E) (I) of the BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION [RULE 4(e) (i) OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO. _____ OF 2020 Chirag Chanani & Ors ... Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents I N D E X Sr. Date Exh Page Particulars No. No. 1. Proforma I-III 2. Synopsis A-E 3. Petition 1-22 4. Vakalatnama 23 5. Memorandum of 26 Address 6. List of Documents 27 7. 31.05.2020 A Copy of guidelines issued 29 by the Government of India 8. 19.06.2020 B Copy of circular issued by 41 divisional railway manager’s office 9. 19.06.2020 C Copy of letter by Bar 42 council of Maharashtra & Goa to Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs. 10. 25.06.2020 D Copies of Circulars issued 43 by Respondents 03.07.2020 11. 18.05.2020 E Copy of order of Delhi 45 High Court 12. F Copy of the relevant 49 Section of The Maharashtra Essential Services Act 2017 13. G Copy of the Preamble of 57 Chapter II of Bar Council of India Rules, 2009. 14. 20.06.2020 H Copy of Representation 159 made. 15. 26.06.2020 I Copy of letter by 166 Respondent No.6 16. 08.06.2020 J Copies of SOP 167 24.06.2020 03.07.2020 17. 06.04.2020 K Copy of 181 circular/guidelines 184 18. Advocates Certificate 19. Affidavit in support 185 of Petition 20. Last page 185 Date: __.07.202006 Place: Mumbai Advocate for Petitioners Dewani Associates IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION [RULE 4(e) (i) OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO. _____ OF 2020 Chirag Chanani & Ors ... Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents Office Notes. Office Memorandum of Coram Court’s or Judges Orders appearance. Court’s orders or direction and Prothonotary’s Orders Office Notes. Office Memorandum of Court’s or Judges Orders Coram appearance. Court’s orders or direction and Prothonotary’s Orders Office Notes. Office Memorandum of Court’s or Judges Orders Coram appearance. Court’s orders or direction and Prothonotary’s Orders A IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION [RULE 4(e) (i) OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO. _____ OF 2020 Chirag Chanani & Ors ... Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents SYNOPSIS The Petitioners are lawyers, practicing in various Courts at Mumbai and suburbs interalia seeking direction to hold and declare that the services rendered by a lawyer are essential services and to include lawyers in the list of persons entitled to travel by local train in special trains being run during the Pandemic restrictions and to declare that the action of the respondent No. 2 and 6 in restricting prohibiting lawyers from commuting by local train during pandemic restriction is absolutely illegal and bad in law. DATES AND EVENTS SR. DATE EXH PARTICULARS PAGE NO. NOS. 1. 18.03.2020 Maharashtra Government had directed closure of all establishments in Malls, Gyms, Swimming pools, Theatres to deal with the situation in Maharashtra due to Pandemic. B 2. 22.03.2020 There was self imposed curfew which was followed by Government of 23.03.2020 Maharashtra ordering for closure of all except few necessary establishments and offices, by imposing Curfew with effect from 23.03.2020. 3. 25.03.2020 The Government of India ordered for complete Lockdown for a period of 21 days from the midnight. 4. 01.06.2020 The lockdown was extended from time to time although many relaxations have been given by the Government of Maharashtra. 5. 31.05.2020 A The Government of Maharashtra had issued the guidelines, which were titled as unlock 1.0, wherein most of the establishments and private offices were allowed to be opened with certain restrictions 6. 08.06.2020 Private offices including lawyers office and courts started functioning. 7. 16.06.2020 It is evident from the news articles and other sources of media that the State Government has allowed almost 346 local trains to ply on Western, Central and Harbour line. 8. 125,000 essential staff, as identified by the State Government, is allowed and expected to travel by these trains 9. 19.06.2020 B The Divisional Railway Manager’s office issued a circular enumerating the categories of essential services staff permitted to travel by local train 10. 19.06.2020 C The Chairman of Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa addressed a C letter to the Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs for the State of Maharashtra, requestingto grant permission to lawyers and staff of Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa travel by local trains. 11. 26.06.2020 D The Respondent No.2 through its Chief Secretary addressed a letter to the Chairman of Railway Board thereby requesting to allow Defence and Bank Employees to travel in local train and thereafter Central Railway, Commercial Division, having its Divisional office at CST, issued a circular which enlisted the different categories of essential staff but unfortunately that list doesn’t include Advocates practising in Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) 12. 18.05.2020 E The lawyers services have been considered has essential services by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide its order regarding issuing e-passes to lawyers. 13. F Section 2 (a) (iv) of The Maharashtra Essential Services Maintenance Act 2011, includes officers of the High Court within the definition of essential services. It is submitted that as the Maharashtra Essential Services Act includes lawyer’s services as essential service. 14. G Every lawyer enrolled under the Bar Council of India unquestionably is an officer of the Court and thus performs essential services of being a medium of rendering justice to people as D mentioned in the Preamble of Chapter II of Bar Council of India Rules, 2009. 15. 20.06.2020 H The Petitioners were constrained to make a representation to the Respondent No. 2 to 5, seeking their intervention and necessary directions to permit the lawyers to travel by local train. 16. 26.06.2020 I The Respondent No. 6 has issued direction to Railway Authorities wherein the request is made to permit the staff of Government Pleader office, the office of Advocate General, as well as the staff of High Court to travel by local train 17. 08.06.2020 J Circulars issued by this Hon’ble court which has laid down procedure for 24.06.2020 physical filing commencing from 03.07.2020 25.06.2020 and that of Apex Court has also re-opened physical acceptance of documents/filing from 04.07.2020 onwards 18. 06.04.2020 K The Honourable Apex Court had vide circular/guidelines started the court hearing through virtual courts/video conferencing. 19. Hence this Petition Points to be urged 1) Whether the services rendered by a lawyer are essential services ? 2) Whether respondent No. 2 and 3 should include lawyers in the list of persons entitled to travel by local train in special trains being run during the Pandemic restrictions? E 3) Whether the act of the that the action of the respondent No. 2 and 6 in restricting prohibiting lawyers/ advocates from commuting by local train during pandemic restriction is justified, valid and legal in law ? List of Acts relied upon 1) The Constitution of India. 2) Disaster Management Act, 2005 3) The Maharashtra Essential Services Act 2011 4) Bar Council of India Rules, 2009. Authorities to be cited Nil at present Place: Mumbai Date: __.07.202006 Advocate for Petitioner Dewani Associates 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION [RULE 4(e) (i) OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES, 2010] PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) PETITION NO. _____ OF 2020 1. Chirag S/o. Rajiv Chanani ] Age: 37 Years, Occupation: Advocate ] Residing at C-701, Gayatri Shivam CHSL, ] 90 Feet Road, Thakur Complex, ] Kandivili (East), Mumbai – 400101 ] 2. Vinay Kumar ] Age: 29 Years, Occupation: Advocate ] B/2, The Parle Colony CHSL, ] Sahakar Road, Off Sahar Road, ] Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 400 057. ] 3. Sumit S/o. Jagdish Kumar Khanna ] Age: 39 Years, Occupation: Advocate ] F-505, OberoiSplendor, ] Opposite Majas Bus Depot, J.V.L.R ] Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 057 ] …Petitioners ….//VERSUS//…. 1. Union of India, ] Ministry of Railway, ] North Block, New Delhi-110001 ] Through its Secretary ] Email :[email protected] ] 2. State of Maharashtra, ] 2 through its Chief Secretary, ] Department of Revenue and Forest, ] Disaster Management, Relief ] and Rehabilitation, Mantralaya, Mumbai ] Email: [email protected] ] 3. Commissioner of Police (Railways) ] --th Floor, Area Manager Building, ] PD Mello Road, ] Sandhurst Road, Mumbai-400 010. ] Email :[email protected] ] 4. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ] B.M.C HQ, Mumbai CST-400 001. ] Through its Commissioner ] Email :[email protected] ] 5. Commissioner of Police, Mumbai ] Crawford Market, Mumbai. ] Email: [email protected] ] 6. The Director, ] Disaster Management Unit, ] Government of Maharashtra, ] Mantralaya, Mumbai ] Email: [email protected] ] …Respondents THE HUMBLE WRIT PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVENAMED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF:- BY THE WAY OF APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, DIRECT RESPONDENT NOS. 2 & 6 TO PERMIT/ALLOW LAWYERS/ADVOCATES /ADVOCATES PRACTISING IN ALL ACROSS MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION (MMR) TO 3 TRAVEL BY SUBURBAN/LOCAL TRAINS BEING RUN DURING THE PANDEMIC RESTRICTIONS; PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION PETITION:- The Petitioners named above most respectfully beg to submit as under: I.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bombay High Court
    2007 Bombay High Court 2007 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL S 7142128 S 4111825S 4111825S 1 8 15 22 29 M 1 8152229 M 51219 26 M 51219 26 M 2 9 16 23 30 T 2 9162330 T 6132027 T 6132027 T 3101724 W 3 10 17 24 31 W 7142128 W 7142128W 4111825 T 4 11 18 25 T 1 8 15 22 T 1 8 15 22 29 T 5121926 F 5 12 19 26 F 2916 23 F 2 9 16 23 30 F 6 13 20 27 S 61320 27 S 31017 24 S 3 10 17 24 31 S 7 14 21 28 1. Sundays, Second & Fourth Saturdays and other Holidays are shown in red. MAY 2. The Summer Vacation of the Court will commence on Monday the 7th May, JUNE S 6132027 2007 and the Court will resume its sitting on Monday the 4th June, 2007. S 3101724 3. The court will remain closed on account of October Vacation from 5th M 7142128 November to 18th November, 2007. M 4111825 T 1 8 15 22 29 4. Christmas Vacation from 24th December, 2007 to 6th January, 2008. T 5121926 5. Id-uz-Zuha, Muharram, Milad-un-Nabi, Id-ul-Fitr and Id-uz-Zuha W 2 9 16 23 30 respectively are subject to change depending upon the visibility of the W 6132027 T 3 10 17 24 31 Moon. If the Government of India declares any change in these dates through T 7142128 TV/AIR/Newspaper, the same will be followed. F 4 11 18 25 6.
    [Show full text]
  • The High Court at Bombay (Extension of Jurisdiction to Goa, Daman and Diu) Act, 1981 Act No
    THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY (EXTENSION OF JURISDICTION TO GOA, DAMAN AND DIU) ACT, 1981 ACT NO. 26 OF 1981 [9th September, 1981.] An Act to provide for the extension of the jurisdiction of the High Court at Bombay to the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu, for the establishment of a permanent bench of that High Court at Panaji and for matters connected therewith. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Thirty-second Year of the Republic of India as follows:— 1. Short title and commencement.—(1) This Act may be called the High Court at Bombay (Extension of Jurisdiction to Goa, Daman and Diu) Act, 1981. (2) It shall come into force on such date1 as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. 2. Definitions.—In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (a) “appointed day” means the date on which this Act comes into force; (b) “Court of the Judicial Commissioner” means the Court of the Judicial Commissioner for Goa, Daman and Diu. 3. Extension of jurisdiction of Bombay High Court to Goa, Daman and Diu.—(1) On and from the appointed day, the jurisdiction of the High Court at Bombay shall extend to the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu. (2) On and from the appointed day, the Court of the Judicial Commissioner shall cease to function and is hereby abolished: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall prejudice or affect the continued operation of any notice served, injunction issued, direction given or proceedings taken before the appointed day by the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, abolished by this sub-section, under the powers then conferred upon that Court.
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of Judicature at Bombay
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION \9 NOTICE OF MOTION(NO.S2J"OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1286 OF 2018 Mumbai Cricket Association. ... Applicant (Original Respondent No.1) In the matter between NadimMemon ... Petitioner VERSUS Mumbai Cricket Association &Ors ... Respondents. INDEX Date Exh.No. Particulars Page No. Proforma Notice of Motion 1-8 Affidavit in support of Notice of . 9-15 Motion ". , 6/4/2018. A. Copy of order. 16-2~ 2/5/2018 B. News paper report in Times ofIndia 23 2/5/2018 C. Copy of Minutes of Committee of 24 Administrators of Respondent No.1 ~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1286 OF 2018 Mumbai Cricket Association, a public ) Trust registered under the provisions of ) Bombay public trust Act, 1950 as also a ) Society registered under the provision of the ) Societies Registration Act, 1860 having its ) Office at Cricket Center, Wankhede Stadium, ) Churchgate Mumbai- 400020. ) .. '" Applicant (Original Respondent No.1) In the matter between:- Nadim Memon, an adult Indian Inhabitant ) Occupation ;- Business having his address at ) 22, Rustom Sidwa Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 ) ... Petitioner Vis 1) Mumbai Cricket Association, a public ) Trust registered under the provisions of ) Bombay public trust Act, 1950 as also a ) Society registered under the provision of the ) Societies Registration Act, 1860 having its ) Office at Cricket Center, Wankhede Stadium, ) Churchgate Mumbai- 400020. ) v 2) Wizcraft International Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. ) A company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 ) Having its registered office at Satyadev Plaza, ) 5th Floor, Fun Republic Lane, Off.
    [Show full text]
  • Reportable in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay
    WWW.LIVELAW.IN Board of Control for Cricket in India vs Deccan Chronicle Holding Ltd CARBPL-4466-20-J.docx GP A/W AGK & SSM REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION COMM ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO. 4466 OF 2020 Board of Control for Cricket in India, a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 and having its head office at Cricket Centre, Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai 400 020 … Petitioner ~ versus ~ Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd, a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and having its registered office at 36, Sarojini Devi Road, Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh … Respondent appearances Mr Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, with FOR THE PETITIONER Samrat Sen, Kanu Agrawal, Indranil “BCCI” Deshmukh, Adarsh Saxena, Ms R Shah and Kartik Prasad, Advocates i/b Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas Page 1 of 176 16th June 2021 ::: Uploaded on - 16/06/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 16/06/2021 17:38:08 ::: WWW.LIVELAW.IN Board of Control for Cricket in India vs Deccan Chronicle Holding Ltd CARBPL-4466-20-J.docx Mr Haresh Jagtiani, Senior Advocate, with Mr Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate, FOR THE RESPONDENT Mr Sharan Jagtiani, Senior Advocate, “DCHL” Yashpal Jain, Suprabh Jain, Ankit Pandey, Ms Rishika Harish & Ms Bhumika Chulani, Advocates i/b Yashpal Jain CORAM : GS Patel, J JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 12th January 2021 JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 16th June 2021 JUDGMENT: OUTLINE OF CONTENTS This judgment is arranged in the following parts. A. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 4 B. THE CHALLENGE IN BRIEF; SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS................................................ 6 C. THE AMBIT OF SECTION 34 .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • LAW MANTRA THINK BEYOND OTHERS (I.S.S.N 2321- 6417 (Online) Ph: +918255090897 Website: Journal.Lawmantra.Co.In E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]
    LAW MANTRA THINK BEYOND OTHERS (I.S.S.N 2321- 6417 (Online) Ph: +918255090897 Website: journal.lawmantra.co.in E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] INGRESSION OF WOMEN IN PLACES OF WORSHIP AN EQUALITY DIMENSION Abstract:- The bans such as women’s entry into temples involve notions and norms which directly clash with ideas of modernity and are also incompatible with rights enshrined in the Constitution. In a secular country like India, which promises to protect the rights of its citizens to practice religion and faith of his or her choice, rulings such as banning menstruating women to enter places of worship by priests are a violation of their rights. Women’s groups and organizations have come forward and challenged this whole notion of “purity-impurity” and are protesting against this unjust ruling by the temple heads in the name of god, religion, culture and practices. It seems that there is an increasing interest and inclination towards religion, and worship of gods and goddesses in recent years. This paper brings to limelight the violative provisions of law as a result of this unjust practice. Further, the paper will contrast certain cases with judicial responses on the related issues. Introduction: Human Rights these days is the most commonly debated topic, be it nationally or internationally. Those are rights that an individual possesses by virtue of being human and when the term human is used it should include both men as well as women, because it has become immensely important to understand that women also have these human rights because gender equality is there in the very core concept of human rights.
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Notice of Motion No
    211-NMS2144-10-PIDILITE-F.DOC SHEPHALI IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2144 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 2130 OF 2010 1. PIDILITE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its office at Regent Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai 4"" "#1 2. HARDCASTLE & WAUD MANUFACTURING CO. LTD., A company incorporated under Indian Companies Act, 1913 having its office at Brabourne Stadium, Gate No. 10, 1st *+oor, 8-, Veer Nariman Road, Mumbai !"" 0#" And also at/ 190!, G$DC, 'arigam (.a+sad District2, (u3arat ...P !"#$"%%& Versus 1. VILAS NEMICHAND JAIN, trading as Ne4 Era Adhesive Industries, %, Bhi6amchand 7ain Comp+e8, 7a+gaon – !#5 0"1, District 7a+gaon 1MS2 2. M'S. NEW ERA, %, Bhi6amchand 7ain Comp+e8, 7a+gaon – Bombay!#5 0"1, District 7a+gaon High 1MS2 A9'O A; Court Post Sa6+i, ;a+u6a Ya4a+, 7a+gaon, Maharashtra – 4#5 3"#) ...D(%(#)!#$& 1 *% 2+ ::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 07/10/2015 10:40:45 ::: 211-NMS2144-10-PIDILITE-F.DOC APPEARANCES FOR THE PLAINTIFFS D,. V. V. T- .!/-,0!,1 Se#"*, A)2*3!$(, with Mr. Sandip Parikh, Mr. Ashish Kamat, Mr. Rahul Duote, Mr. Minesh Andharia & Mr. Hemant Thadani, i/ Krishna & Saurastri Asso!iates. FOR THE DEFENDANTS D,. B. Sa,!%, with Mr. Vinod "ha#at, Mr. Dhiren Karania & Mr. Punit $ain, i/ %.S. He#de & V. "ha#at, &or De&endants 'os. 1 and ). CORAM 4 G. S. P!$( 1 J. JUDGMENT RESERVED ON 4 4$h Sept(67(, 2018 JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON 4 9$h S(/$(67(, 2018 JUDGMENT4 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Papers
    Working Papers www.mmg.mpg.de/workingpapers MMG Working Paper 13-04 ● ISSN 2192-2357 SUMEET MHASKAR Indian Muslims in a Global City: Socio-Political Effects on Economic Preferences in Contemporary Mumbai Religious and Ethnic Diversity und multiethnischer Gesellschaften Max Planck Institute for the Study of Max Planck Institute for the Study of Max-Planck-Institut zur Erforschung multireligiöser Sumeet Mhaskar Indian Muslims in a Global City: Socio-Political Effects on Economic Preferences in Contemporary Mumbai MMG Working Paper 13-04 Max-Planck-Institut zur Erforschung multireligiöser und multiethnischer Gesellschaften, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity Göttingen © 2013 by the author ISSN 2192-2357 (MMG Working Papers Print) Working Papers are the work of staff members as well as visitors to the Institute’s events. The analyses and opinions presented in the papers do not reflect those of the Institute but are those of the author alone. Download: www.mmg.mpg.de/workingpapers MPI zur Erforschung multireligiöser und multiethnischer Gesellschaften MPI for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen Hermann-Föge-Weg 11, 37073 Göttingen, Germany Tel.: +49 (551) 4956 - 0 Fax: +49 (551) 4956 - 170 www.mmg.mpg.de [email protected] Abstract This paper examines the effects of socio-political processes on economic preferences in Mumbai by focussing on the case of Muslim ex-millworkers. The argument of this paper is that the feeling of karahiyat [Urdu: nausea, disgust, hate, etc.] com- bined with suspicion, in terms of terrorism and mafia, creates barriers for Muslims’ employment and self-employment opportunities. The argument is substantiated by using the survey data of 924 ex-millworkers and in-depth interviews with 80 ex-mill- workers collected during 2008-09 and 2010-11.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Religion and the Indian Supreme Court: The
    FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND THE INDIAN SUPREME COURT: THE RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION AND ESSENTIAL PRACTICES TESTS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN RELIGION MAY 2019 By Coleman D. Williams Thesis Committee: Ramdas Lamb, Chairperson Helen Baroni Ned Bertz Abstract As a religiously diverse society and self-proclaimed secular state, India is an ideal setting to explore the complex and often controversial intersections between religion and law. The religious freedom clauses of the Indian Constitution allow for the state to regulate and restrict certain activities associated with religious practice. By interpreting the constitutional provisions for religious freedom, the judiciary plays an important role in determining the extent to which the state can lawfully regulate religious affairs. This thesis seeks to historicize the related development of two jurisprudential tests employed by the Supreme Court of India: the religious denomination test and the essential practices test. The religious denomination test gives the Court the authority to determine which groups constitute religious denominations, and therefore, qualify for legal protection. The essential practices test limits the constitutional protection of religious practices to those that are deemed ‘essential’ to the respective faith. From their origins in the 1950s up to their application in contemporary cases on religious freedom, these two tests have served to limit the scope of legal protection under the Constitution and legitimize the interventionist tendencies of the Indian state. Additionally, this thesis will discuss the principles behind the operation of the two tests, their most prominent criticisms, and the potential implications of the Court’s approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Sabarimala and Women's Entry
    EDITORIAL NOTE SABARIMALA AND WOMEN’S ENTRY: NEED FOR A BAN ON THE BAN I. IntrOductiON Restricting women’s entry to places of religious worship has become a highly contentious issue of late. Though such practices have been persisting for decades in India,1 movements across the country have recently espoused these concerns, leading to several petitions being filed in High Courts and in the Supreme Court. Demonstrating an encouraging trend, courts have emphatically upheld rights of women to equality and freedom of religion, thus striking down the restrictions imposed. The Bombay High Court, for instance, ruled that the inner sanctum of the Shani Shingnapur temple in Ahmednagar, Maharashtra be opened to women, as it is the fundamental right of women to enter all places of worship that allow entry to men, and the duty of the state to protect such right.2 The Court relied on the Maharashtra Hindu Places of Public Worship (Entry Authorisation) Act, 1956, which prohibits obstructing a section or class of the Hindu population from entering places of worship.3 In September, 2016, in a landmark decision, the Bombay High Court permitted the entry of women entry into the sanctum sanctorum at the 1 Several places of worship in India deny entry to women, including the Haji Ali Dargah in Bombay, the Patbausi Satra in Assam, the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, the Trimbakeshwar temple in Nashik and the Kartikeya temple in Pushkar. A common justification given is the fear that the sanctity of the temple premise would be compromised by menstruating women who are considered impure and polluted.
    [Show full text]
  • HIGH COURT, BOMBAY Calendar for the Year 2021
    HIGH COURT, BOMBAY Calendar for the year 2021 2021 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL SUNDAY 31 3 10 17 24 7 14 21 28 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 MONDAY 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 TUESDAY 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 WEDNESDAY 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 THURSDAY 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 FRIDAY 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 SATURDAY 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 26 Republic Day 19 Chhatrapati 29 Holi (2nd day) 2 Good Friday Shivaji Maharaj 12 Holiday Jayanti 13 Gudi Padwa 14 Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Jayanti MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SUNDAY 30 2 9 16 23 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 MONDAY 31 3 10 17 24 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 TUESDAY 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 31 WEDNESDAY 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 THURSDAY 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 FRIDAY 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 SATURDAY 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 1 Maharashtra Day 21 Bakri Id 16 Parsi New Year 14 Ramzan Id 19 Moharrum 26 Buddha Pournima SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER SUNDAY 5 12 19 26 31 3 10 17 24 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 MONDAY 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 TUESDAY 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 WEDNESDAY 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 THURSDAY 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 FRIDAY 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 SATURDAY 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25 10 Ganesh Chaturthi 2 Mahatma Gandhi 1-6 Diwali Holidays Jayanti 19 Guru Nanak 15 Dasara Jayanti 19 Id-E-Milad ..2/- ..2.
    [Show full text]
  • Dated 9Th October, 2018 Reg. Appointment of Chief Justice In
    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Re: Appointment of Chief Justice in Bombay High Court. Office of the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court has been lying vacant for quite some time, consequent upon retirement of Mrs. Justice Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice of tha t High Court. Therefore, appointment to that office is required to be made. Mr. Justice N.H. Patil is the senior-most Judge from Bombay High Court and at present is functioning as Acting Chief Justice of that High Court. Having regard to all relevant factors, the Collegium finds Mr. Justice N.H. Patil suitable in all respects for being appointed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. The Collegium resolves to recommend accordingly. While making the above recommendation, the Collegium has also taken into consideration the fact that at present there are two Chief Justices from Bombay High Court and, out of two Chief Justices, one viz. Mr. Justice D.B. Bhosale is going to retire on superannuation shortly on 23rd October, 2018 thereby leaving only one Chief Justice from Bombay High Court, which is one of the biggest High Courts with sanctioned Judge-strength of 94 Judges. It is made clear that the Collegium while making the above recommendation is conscious of the fact that Mr. Justice N.H. Patil hails from Bombay High Court and is due to retire in April 2019. In this connection, the Collegium has invoked the provision of the Memorandum of Procedure which provides for elevation of a puisne Judge as Chief Justice in his own High Court if he has one year or less to retire.
    [Show full text]
  • BOMBAY HIGH COURT.Pdf
    BOMBAY HIGH COURT S. Court Date of Date Panel Tel(O No Name Address Nam Appointmen of Tel (R) Name ) . e t expiry High Addl. Court Of Public 30/05/201 1 Rajesh Desai Bombay High Court, Mumbai 30/05/2012 Bombay, Presecuto 5 Mumbai r High Addl. Court Of Public 30/05/201 2 Shahji R. Shinde Bombay High Court, Mumbai 30/05/2012 Bombay, Presecuto 5 Mumbai r High Addl. Court Of Public 30/05/201 3 Hiten S. Venegavkar Bombay High Court, Mumbai 30/05/2012 Bombay, Presecuto 5 Mumbai r High Addl. Court Of Public 30/05/201 4 Uma Palsuledesai Bombay High Court, Mumbai 30/05/2012 Bombay, Presecuto 5 Mumbai r GULESTAN BLD. 4TH FLOR, MAHRASHI High DADHICHI ROAD,NEAR Court Of Special 28/06/201 5 L.S. SHETTY 29/06/2009 22004411 I.B. PATIT SCHOOL, Bombay, Counsel 2 FLORA FOUNTAIN, Mumbai MUMBAI-400 001. 403, SADICCHA TOWER, High JAYANT C. BESIDE HOTEL ROYAL Court Of Special 23/08/201 25397129, 6 24/08/2009 SATPUTE INN,OLD AGRAROAD, Bombay, Counsel 2 25397328 THANE (W)-400 601. Mumbai High 73/63, MEHRDAD, CUFFE POORNIMA Court Of Special 15/11/201 22844332, 7 PARADE,MUMBAI-400 16/11/2009 ADVANI Bombay, Counsel 2 22822201 005. Mumbai SONAWALA BUILDING, High 2ND FLOOR, 19, BANK Court Of Special 15/11/201 22679885, 8 BENI M. CHATTERJI 16/11/2009 STREET,FORT, MUMBAI- Bombay, Counsel 2 26311944 400 023. Mumbai 401, GODAVARI SADAN, High SURESH KASHINATH DHURU Court Of Special 15/11/201 9 SHANTARAM MARG,NEAR KEERTI 16/11/2009 Bombay, Counsel 2 PAKALE COLLEGE, DADAR(W) Mumbai MUMBAI-400 028.
    [Show full text]