SC

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the semester system introduced by the Delhi University for undergraduate courses.

A bench of justices G S Singhvi and C K Prasad also refused to interfere with the Delhi High Court order restraining the lecturers and professors from staging any form of protest or demonstration in the campus.

“We are not inclined to stay the (university) notification,” the bench said, following which the agitating lecturers withdrew their appeal against the high court order.

Senior counsel Jayant Bhushan and Counsel Tariq Adeeb, appearing for the petitioners assailed the university notification terming it as “arbitrary, illegal and introduced without proper application of mind.”

The counsel argued that the university was choosing to push the notification for introduction of semester system from this academic year by invoking certain emergency powers vested in the varsity’s vice-chancellor.

Bhushan submitted that the system was being introduced despite strong protest from both the teaching community and the students, as the system has no approval for the proposed new syllabus and curriculum for various subjects.

The arguments failed to convince the apex court which proceeded to dismiss the same but allowed its withdrawal after the counsel sought permission.

The second set of charges may be levelled in the supplementary chargesheet which is likely to be filed later this month.

The CBI has informed the Supreme Court that telecom companies – Swan Telecom and Loop Telecom – were used as front companies by established telecom players to get 2G spectrum illegally during the tenure of Raja.

The agency had said in the court that Raja will face charges of “cheating, forgery, and corruption”.

The CBI submitted before the court that Swan and Loop hid details about their companies to get spectrum and they will be facing charges of “cheating” and “criminal conspiracy”.

The agency had told the court that there was evidence of “forgery” in altering of first-come-first-serve policy to allow some companies to get 2G spectrum during Raja’s tenure.

CBI sources, however, said the extent of loss to the state exchequer may not be included in this chargesheet as the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) was yet to complete the process of ascertaining the loss on allocation of spectrum to all operators between 2001 and 2008.

The chargesheet will be filed in the special court of Justice O P Saini.

The CBI had last year informed the apex court that it would be filing the first set of charge sheet by 31^st March which will include the investigations made by the agency as well as by the Enforcement Directorate in the case. But it sought two more days time in the light of some new developments.

The agency had arrested brother of Shahid Balwa, Asif and Rajiv Agrawal both promoters of Kusegaon fruit and vegetables private limited.

The CBI is expected to seek permission from the court for continuance of its probe in the case after filing its first chargesheet.

It wants to investigate various angles including criminal conspiracy for favouring certain companies, abuse of official position for getting pecuniary benefits and the companies which manipulated the records to secure loans.

The sources said that besides those arrested in the case including Raja, his personal aide R K Chandolia, former Telecom Secretary Siddartha Behura, former Managing Director of Etislat DB (earlier Swan Telecom) Shahid Usman Balwa.

The probe agency had earlier said the government may have lost over Rs 22,000 crore due to irregularities in the allocation of spectrum in January, 2008, by Raja who was arrested on charges of favouring some private firms.

The CAG has put the presumptive loss to the exchequer at Rs 1.76 lakh crore.

The Champions

Soon  it was announced that the Indian sub-continent would host ICC World Cup 2011 and moreover that the final was to be staged in Mumbai not in Pakistan, the expectation that India, unquestionably the most fanatical of the cricketing nations, would be the side that would hold the trophy aloft.

In doing so, they became the first host nation to win the trophy: the pressure of that expectation too much of a burden for sides previous and great credit should be given to the Indian side for overcoming the levels of expectation that no other sporting side has to bear.

Whilst the dreams of over a billion people came true, the fairytale of Sachin Tendulkar crowning the occasion with his hundredth century for India was not to be. The sight, post-game, of him being held aloft on his team-mates shoulders said everything. As twenty-two year old batsman (who was only just born when Tendulkar made his Indian debut aged 16) Virat Kohli said: “Sachin carried the burden of a nation for 21 years so he deserves it.”

Sachin With World cup

It was a deserved win for India on balance, but at the half-way stage looked to be a run chase that may just be beyond them. The onslaught from the Sri Lankan batsman over the final ten overs, aided by the wonderfully caressed hundred from Mahela Jayawardene (the sixth in a World Cup final – and the only one to end up on the losing side), pushed a competitive total into the realms of a challenging one.

India started their innings poorly too. Virender Sehwag, the man who so often sets the tone, trapped LBW second ball to Lasith Malinga for a duck. Tendulkar started brightly and looked set, but he too became a victim of Malinga, edging behind for 18; the stadium fell silent, united in disbelief.

Sachin with Family

Kohli and Gautam Gambhir managed to stabilise the innings, less than aggressive Sri Lankan field placings aiding their ability to keep the score ticking over, and when Kohli departed in came MS Dhoni. Taking captains responsibility, he pushed himself up the order ahead of the in-form man of the tournament Yuvraj. He and Gambhir continued the pace and put on 109 as India moved into the ascendancy. Gambhir fell though, a loose shot when a century was in sight with still needing 44 to win and with Malinga and Muttiah Muralitharan with overs left.

Muralitharan though, try as he might, could not conjure up one final spell of magic before riding off into the sunset and once Yuvraj had steadied himself, India chased down their total, with, perhaps fittingly, the winning runs hit long and straight from the bat of Dhoni.

There will be questions for Sri Lanka; namely around their selection in which they made four changes for the final, including jettisoning Ajantha Mendis that looked a gamble that failed.

But this was India’s time, and perhaps all along their destiny was meant to be fulfilled.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday directed the city police chief to conduct an inquiry into an alleged nexus between police officials and illegal parking mafia and sought appropriate action against the culprits.

Issuing notices to the police as well as Delhi government, the court sought responses from them on a PIL alleging a contractor illegally occupying DDA land and charging exorbitant parking fee from the general public in a commercial place in Outer Delhi.

A division bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna directed the Commissioner of Police to conduct the inquiry and take action as per the law.

“Any nexus of this kind between the police and parking mafia will not be allowed. It is the obligation of the police to curb the menace….”.

The bench fixed 4th May as the next date of hearing the matter.

MCD

Filing the PIL through advocate R K Singh, petitioner Shamsher Kaushik alleged a parking contractor Narender Kumar Sharma has illegally encroached the car parking area of Mangalam Commercial plaza in Rohini area in connivance with the local police and charged exorbitant parking fee from the visitors.

The Accused

Relying on circumstantial evidence, a fast-track court on Wednesday convicted Bollywood actor Shiney Ahuja for raping his maid and sentenced him to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment (RI) although the victim had turned hostile during the trial.

The actor was also fined Rs 3,000 by Sessions Judge P M Chouhan.

However, Ahuja was acquitted of the charges of criminal intimidation and wrongful confinement, Public Prosecutor Kashinath Dighe told reporters who were not allowed in the court as the proceedings were in-camera.

Convicting the accused, the court said it had considered circumstantial evidence-the DNA report was positive, the hymen was torn, there were blood marks on victim’s clothes, semen was found on quilt and curtains and Shiney’s hand bore scratch marks of the victim.

The court also noted that the 2009 incident had occurred at Shiney’s house here, the victim’s clothes were torn and there was evidence to show that she had struggled.

It also accepted her statement before a Magistrate alleging she was raped, Dighe said.

After the conviction, the Judge asked Shiney what he had to say about the quantum of sentence.

The actor pleaded for leniency, saying he had a family to look after and a career to pursue.

The prosecution, however, sought life imprisonment or ten years RI for the convict. The court then sentenced him to seven years RI.

SC

The Supreme Court has ruled that law should prevail over equity and that judges should not legislate as it would be violative of the basic democratic principles.

A bench of justices Markandeya Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra in a recent judgement said courts should not interpret rules on the basis of equity.

“In other words, once we depart from the literal rule, then any number of interpretations can be put to a statutory provision, each judge having a free play to put his own interpretation as he likes.

“This would be destructive of judicial discipline, and also the basic principle in a democracy that it is not for the judge to legislate as that is the task of elected representatives of the people. Even if the literal interpretation results in hardship or inconvenience, it has to be followed,” the bench said.

The apex court passed the ruling while setting aside a 23^rd May 2006 judgement of a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court which on the basis of principles of equity upheld the promotion of general category candidates for the post of Block Development Officer (BDOs).

The dispute related to inter se seniority for the post of BDOs between the general category candidates and petitioner Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates.

The apex court said, “The Full Bench and single judge have relied on equity, justice and good conscience, rather than law. We are of the opinion that this approach is incorrect. When there is a conflict between law and equity, it is the law which is to prevail.

“Equity can only supplement the law when there is a gap in it, but it cannot supplant the law. In the present case, Rule 27(c) clearly makes the appellants senior to the respondents as the advice for their appointments were made prior to that for the respondents,” the bench said.

According to Rule 27(c) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, seniority is to be determined “by the date of first effective advice made by the Public Service Commission to the State Government for appointment.

In the present case for the appellants B Premanand and other SC/ST candidates the said advice for appointment was made by the Kerala Public Service Commission on 8^th July 1992 and they joined between 13^th July 1992 and 22^nd October 1992.

Whereas, “advice” for the general category candidates was made on April 6, 1993 and they were appointed as BDOs on September 28, 1993 and they joined between October 6,1993 and November 17, 1993.

However, the Full Bench of the High Court ruled in favour of the general category candidates vis-a-vis seniority on the ground that their original selection was much prior to the SC/ST candidates.

The apex court said that Rule 27(c) of the rules was plain and clear, hence, the literal rule of interpretation would apply to it.

“No doubt, equity may be in favour of the respondents because they were selected earlier, but as observed earlier, if there is a conflict between equity and the law, it is the law which must prevail. The law, which is contained in Rule 27(c), is clearly in favour of the appellants,” the bench said.

In this context, the bench recalled the ancient “Mimansa Rules of Interpretation,” which, it said, were regrettably hardly ever used in our law courts.

“It may be mentioned that it is not stated anywhere in the Constitution of India that only Maxwell’s Principles of Interpretation can be utilised. We can utilise any system of interpretation which can help to resolve a difficulty.

“According to the Mimansa principles, the Shruti (literal meaning) will prevail over the Linga (suggestive power),” the bench said.

It said where the words of a statute are absolutely clear and unambiguous, recourse cannot be had to the principles of interpretation other than the literal rule.

“The language employed in a statute is the determinative factor of the legislative intent. The legislature is presumed to have made no mistake. The presumption is that it intended to say what it has said.

“Assuming there is a defect or an omission in the words used by the legislature, the court cannot correct or make up the deficiency,” it said.

The apex court said a departure from the literal rule should only be done in very rare cases, and ordinarily there should be judicial restraint in this connection.

“In other words, the literal rule of interpretation simply means that we mean what we say and we say what we mean. If we do not follow the literal rule of interpretation, social life will become impossible, and we will not understand each other. Life will become impossible,” the bench added.

With the passage of the Finance Bill, the Lok Sabha completed the three-stage budgetary exercise amid walkout by the Opposition BJP.

Replying to the debate on Finance Bill, Mukherjee also modified tax proposals relating to ready-made garments, dividend tax, personal computers, printers, mobile phones and auto parts.

“The proposed levy on health care has raised considerable anxiety in this House and outside. The purpose of the levy was not merely to mobilise revenue. It was to pave the way for the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST). However, I have decided to exempt the new levy in its entirety both in respect of services provided by hospitals as well as by way of diagnostic tests until GST comes into force,” Mukherjee said.

The announcement of withdrawal of the 5 per cent service tax on services provided by air-conditioned hospitals of more than 25 beds and on diagnostic services was greeted with loud thumping on desks by members as the Minister hoped that it will no more be called “misery tax”.

Mukherjee also exempted coking coal used in manufacture of iron and steel from customs duty and reduced duty on CKD (completely knocked down) kits containing re-assembled engine, gear-box or transmission assembly for the manufacture of vehicle.

The minister, however, imposed one per cent additional excise duty and CVD on mobile handsets.

Announcing some relief for the computer industry, the Minister said, “I extend the concessional rate of 5 per cent CVD and nil SAD (special additional duty) to parts of all computer printers imported by actual users…I also exempted certain special parts of personal computers from levy of (special additional duty) of customs.”

With regard to direct taxes, the Minister relaxed the norms for companies which shall be entitled to pay tax at concessional rate of 15 per cent on dividends received from overseas subsidiaries.

The proposal on health care, mooted by the minister as part of the budget for 2011-12 on February 28, had evoked sharp reactions from various groups, including eminent doctors, who had dubbed it as “misery tax”.

During the general discussion on the Budget last week, almost all political parties wanted the finance minister to withdraw the health care service tax proposal.

Referring to the concern expressed by small scale garment manufacturers on 10 per cent excise levy on branded ready-made textiles garments, Mukherjee proposed to enhance the abatement from 40 per cent to 55 per cent of the retail sale price.

With this relief, a unit will continue to be eligible for SSI exemption in 2011-12 even if it had a turnover based on retail sale price of Rs 8.9 crore in the current year, the Minister said.

The garment traders had criticized the proposed 10 per cent excise duty on readymade garments saying it would hurt the small business.

“I would also like to reiterate that the levy does not apply on unbranded goods… it does not apply to made for order retail customer,” the Minister said, adding that the proposal was aimed at preparing the ground for implementation of the GST.

On the reduction of basic customs duty on raw silk from 30 per cent to 5 per cent ad valorem, he said, there has been representations supporting and opposing the move.

The government would keep a close watch on import volumes and domestic prices and respond, if required, to mitigate any impact on the domestic sericulture sector, the Minister said.

The Bill, introduced by Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee seeks to amend the constitution with a view to confer simultaneous powers on centre and states to levy taxes on goods and services.

Indian Emblem

“The GST would replace a number of indirect taxes presently being levied by the central government and the state governments and is intended to remove cascading of taxes and provide a common national market for goods and services”, said the statement of objects and reasons of the Bill.

The Bill provides for creation of a GST Council to be headed by Union Finance Minister. The Council will be empowered to recommend tax rates and exemption and threshold limits for good and services.

Besides, the bill proposed a GST Dispute Settlement Authority to deal with grievances of the centre and the state with regard to GST.

The GST, which is considered to be a major tax reform, has been pending for the last four years due to differences between centre and some states over the structure of the new tax regime.

It will facilitate implementation of a new tax regime that subsumes levies like excise, sales and service tax.

The GST, which is considered as a major tax reform, has been pending for the last four years due to differences between centre and some states over the structure of the new tax regime.

“The decision to table the bill is a positive development. The Finance Minister was committed to bring it in the current session and he is doing that,” Ernst and Young Tax Partner Harishanker Subramaniam said.

The Finance Ministry has worked on the final draft Constitution Amendment Bill, the fourth since the discussions on the new tax regime commenced.

Earlier, the first three drafts prepared by the Centre were rejected by the states citing autonomy issues.

The fourth draft, a hybrid of the second and third draft, has proposed setting up of a modified GST council through a presidential order for taking decisions on all important matters.

In addition, the composition of the GST Dispute Resolution Authority, proposed to be a part of the Constitution Amendment, will be decided by Parliament.

Furthermore, petroleum, natural gas, diesel and ATF have been kept out of the GST ambit in the final draft.

Last year, a draft Constitution Bill proposed by the Centre to the states had suggested a council chaired by the Union Finance Minister, with states as members, to make changes in GST.

The states, especially NDA-ruled ones, had raised objections to the proposal, saying it would give veto power to the Union Finance Minister over state taxation issues.

The Centre subsequently provided another draft to states, suggesting that changes in GST could be made only if there was a consensus on those issues in the council.

However, some state finance ministers did not agree to even this suggestion.
Taking into consideration the states’ concerns, the Finance Ministry had then floated a third draft on the GST Constitution Amendment Bill.

Dentist couple Rajesh and Nupur Talwar, facing charges of murder of their daughter Aarushi and domestic help Hemraj in 2008, got a reprieve on Saturday as the Supreme Court stayed the proceedings against them in a trial court in connection with the case.

A bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar, which conducted the extraordinary rpt extraordinary hearing at 7 pm in the apex court on a holiday, however, asked the Talwars to surrender their passports before the trial court by Monday.

No counsel for CBI was present at the hearing which lasted for less than 15 minutes.The bench listed the matter for further hearing “as per the date notified.”

Though Rajesh was not present Nupur was with some close relatives and a battery of lawyers.The couple have challenged the Special CBI Judge’s orders summoning them as accused and issuing bailable warrants in the sensational double murder.

The apex court granted relief to the Talwars after senior counsel Pinaki Mishra and Sandeep Kapur, appearing for the couple, termed the trial court’s orders as being “erroneous without any basis” and submitted that Nupur who was never interrogated by the investigation agency till date and yet had been made an accused.

The counsel further reiterated the defence’s argument in the Allahabad High Court that blood stains recovered from the pillow covers of Hemraj was in fact traced to the residence of Krishna, the compounder.

The counsel alleged that instead of acting against the actual accused, CBI had named the couple as suspects on the basis of which the trial court had summoned them and issued bailable warrants against them.

The bench, however, asked the counsel “what is the problem if you appear before the magistrate? Do you apprehend that you will be sent to jail?”

Admitting that the couple would be sent to jail, Mishra said Rajesh Talwar, after he was badly knifed by a youth, was still under a heavy bandage, making it difficult for him to respond to the summons.

Earlier in the day, the Talwars approached the apex court seeking a stay of criminal proceedings against them in the trial court in the case.The couple challenged the order of the Allahabad High Court which has refused to stay the proceedings before a special CBI court at Ghaziabad in the sensational case.

The Allahabad High Court had yesterday dismissed the Talwar couple’s plea seeking quashing of the proceedings initiated by the lower court which not only refused the closure report of CBI but also summoned them as accused in the case.

The High Court had said that it cannot prohibit the magistrate from taking cognisance of a case if prima facie it appears that there is sufficient evidence against a person.

The High Court had asked Nupur, who had submitted that she had been summoned despite never having been called for interrogation or having been named as an accused in CBI’s closure report, to appear before the trial court within two weeks.

Another petition filed by Rajesh Talwar challenging bailable warrants issued by the Ghaziabad court on February 28 was dismissed by Justice Ravindra Singh.

On February 9, the Ghaziabad court had issued bailable warrants against the couple for their failure to appear before the court and to initiate proceedings against them after it had named them accused while rejecting the closure report of CBI, which was treated as the chargesheet.

14-year-old Aarushi was found murdered at her house in Noida in May 16, 2008, and Hemraj’s body was recovered the following day from the same building.

SC

The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to consider setting up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the black money stashed by Indians abroad.

A bench headed by Justice B Sudershan Reddy said the issue is not related to one case but is much wider and asked the government to consider setting up an SIT comprising officers from different departments including the Enforcement Directorate, the CBI and the IT to look into it.

“We are not talking about one case but many cases are involved in it. This is much wider,” the bench said.

“In principle, do you have any objection to setting up of SIT to look into the matter?” the bench asked the government. It told the Centre to respond on the next date of hearing on 28^th March about its stand and the possible composition of the SIT.

“Before we discuss this issue, both of you (the government and the petitioner) tell us about possible composition of SIT, if the need arises, for setting up the same,” the court said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by eminent criminal lawyer Ram Jethmalani seeking direction to the government to take steps in bringing back black money stashed by Indian nationals in foreign banks, which is said to be to the tune of 1 trillion US dollars.