Follow:
- Next story [1/30, 13:30] sekarreporter1: Supreme Court stays HC proceedings on plea challenging Kanimozhi’s election as MP in 2019: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-stays-hc-proceedings-on-plea-challenging-kanimozhis-election-as-mp-in-2019/article30690693.ece [1/30, 13:30] sekarreporter1: The Thoothukudi MP in her appeal said the High Court erroneously banked on a petition which was at best ‘vague and without material facts’ The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the Madras High Court proceedings on a plea challenging DMK MP M.K. Kanimozhi’s election as the parliamentarian from the Thoothukudi constituency in 2019. A Bench led by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde froze the High Court proceedings on an appeal filed Ms. Kanimozhi against the High Court decision to examine a petition filed by A. Santhana Kumar challenging her election as the Thoothukudi MP. [1/30, 13:30] sekarreporter1: In her appeal, Ms. Kanimozhi, represented by senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, P. Wilson and Joseph Aristotle, said the High Court erroneously banked on a petition which was at best “vague and without material facts”. PAN number of spouse The High Court proceeded on the notion that Ms. Kanimozhi refused to disclose the PAN number of her spouse. Ms. Kanimozhi’s Form 26, submitted with her nomination papers, clearly states that her husband does not have a PAN card in the first place. “The petitioner (Kanimozhi) has clearly mentioned that her spouse does not have a PAN number. If the first respondent (Kumar) herein contends that this statement is wrong, he ought to substantiate the allegation that the statement is incorrect. Without these averments, the bald and vague statement that petitioner has not provided her spouse’s PAN cannot be maintained in an election petition in light of several judgments of the Supreme Court,” the petition said. Ms. Kanimozhi had asked whether it was justified on the part of the High Court to add averments in the election petition as regards the petitioner’s husband’s income tax reference number? “When even the election petitioner does not make an averment that the petitioner’s spouse possesses a PAN card or any such card in Singapore, whether it was correct on part of the High Court to frame such an allegation?” the petition said. Mr. Kumar, in his election petition, had not brought even a single material fact to substantiate his case that Ms. Kanimozhi’s nomination was improper. In fact, Ms. Kanimozhi said his election petition contained hollow allegations chanted over and over like a mantra. Ms. Kanimozhi’s appeal in the Supreme Court had urged for a stay of the High Court proceedings, saying she would otherwise be “forced to face the rigours of trial, which will not only hamper the work of the petitioner as the elected candidate of the people but also cause severe hardships to the petitioner, who will be forced to constantly be in Chennai instead of attending to her official work in Delhi and constituency work in Thoothukudi”.
- Previous story Judges today ஹரி பரந்தாமன்,அக்பர் அலி, கண்ணன் முன்னாள் நீதிபதிகள் தலைமையில் advts ஊர்வலம்
Recent Posts
- In this regard, the Secretary to Government made a submission that all actions for effective administration will be completed within a period of 15 days and thereafter, further actions will be initiated for the purpose of completing works relating to Kalaimagal Sabha. In this regard, therespondents are directed to file a status report on 04th June, 2024.Page 1 of 2https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judisS.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.Jeni
- In the result, the Writ Petitions are disposed of, on the followingterms,(i) Sections 4 and 4A of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights andResponsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 42 of2017) are read down to restrict their operation only for the purposes of the Act(Tamilnadu Act 42 of 2017) as delineated in paragraph 15.2 supra ;(ii) The rest of the provisions of the impugned enactment are declaredto be valid.(iii) There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,W.M.P.Nos.4728, 8860 of 2020; 16530, 18266, 22579, 22582, 22588, 22590,26521, 26523, 27596, 27597, 28342, 28519, 28525 of 2021; 7703, 7708, 1731, 16864, 23302, 23303, 23304 of 2022; 991 and 1718 of 2023 are closed.(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)23.04.2024Index : YesSpeaking orderNeutral Citation : YesJerTo
- s M subramaniyam judge order/ In view of the fact that the petitioners have admittedly signed the bond and accepted the terms and conditions stipulated therein, they are not entitled to claim any concession for further reduction of period stipulated under the bond conditions. Therefore, the petitioners have to serve in Government Medical College and Hospitals as per the appointment order in compliance with the conditions and after completion of the period stipulated, appropriate decision may be taken by the respondents.
- TN govt informs #MadrasHighCourt the TN Heritage Commission (Amendment) Act, 2017 has been notified on March 1, 2024 and has come into effect from then on; the submission was made before first bench led by CJ SV Gangapurwala when a PIL on the matter came up for hearing @xpresstn
- In the W.P No 11463 of 2024 . The Writ Petition was Allowed in the favour of Petitioner
More
Recent Posts
- In this regard, the Secretary to Government made a submission that all actions for effective administration will be completed within a period of 15 days and thereafter, further actions will be initiated for the purpose of completing works relating to Kalaimagal Sabha. In this regard, therespondents are directed to file a status report on 04th June, 2024.Page 1 of 2https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judisS.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.Jeni
- In the result, the Writ Petitions are disposed of, on the followingterms,(i) Sections 4 and 4A of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights andResponsibilities of Landlords and Tenants Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu Act 42 of2017) are read down to restrict their operation only for the purposes of the Act(Tamilnadu Act 42 of 2017) as delineated in paragraph 15.2 supra ;(ii) The rest of the provisions of the impugned enactment are declaredto be valid.(iii) There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,W.M.P.Nos.4728, 8860 of 2020; 16530, 18266, 22579, 22582, 22588, 22590,26521, 26523, 27596, 27597, 28342, 28519, 28525 of 2021; 7703, 7708, 1731, 16864, 23302, 23303, 23304 of 2022; 991 and 1718 of 2023 are closed.(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)23.04.2024Index : YesSpeaking orderNeutral Citation : YesJerTo
- s M subramaniyam judge order/ In view of the fact that the petitioners have admittedly signed the bond and accepted the terms and conditions stipulated therein, they are not entitled to claim any concession for further reduction of period stipulated under the bond conditions. Therefore, the petitioners have to serve in Government Medical College and Hospitals as per the appointment order in compliance with the conditions and after completion of the period stipulated, appropriate decision may be taken by the respondents.
- TN govt informs #MadrasHighCourt the TN Heritage Commission (Amendment) Act, 2017 has been notified on March 1, 2024 and has come into effect from then on; the submission was made before first bench led by CJ SV Gangapurwala when a PIL on the matter came up for hearing @xpresstn
- In the W.P No 11463 of 2024 . The Writ Petition was Allowed in the favour of Petitioner