LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

aditya gupta   08 June 2010 at 15:32

scheduled tribe

i am writing an article on the theme PROTECTION OF SCHEDULED TRIBES: PROMISE & PERFORMANCE... what do the the words 'promise and performance' exactly mean and imply? does it mean the promises that have been made by the constitution and the performance of those promises? or does it mean the promises that should be made and performed to improve their condition?

please put in your suggestion as i am in need of help...

Anil   06 June 2010 at 15:06

violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and Article 14 ?

Determine the 'Creamy Layer” amongst SEBCs. (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes)

According to the aforesaid G.R. SSP-1194-KH-109-A-of-01-11-1995 dated 01-11-1995 (Gov. of Gujarat)“income criteria” are to be reviewed and modified every three years or less.

Even though there were clear directions for such review, there was only one review after 9 years in 2004 revising the original limit of Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 2.5 lakh.Since then there is no Change.

NCL/OBC income limit is 4.5 lkh by Government of India,from 2008
NCL/SEBC income limit is 2.5 lkh by Government of Gujarat,from 2004

This is a clear case of violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and
violation of Article 14 in The Constitution Of India 1949 [Constitution]

The protective discrimination in the shape of job,
reservations under the limit to be prescribed
should not be such as to result in
taking away with one hand what is given
with the other. The income limit must
be such as to mean and signify social
advancement.


SEBC income limit for Non-creamy layer certificate in different states of india is as per given below.

1)Kerala 4.5lkh from 05/10/2009
2)Maharastra 4.5lkh from 1/04/2009
3)U.P. 5.0lkh from 20/10/2008
4)M.P. 4.5lkh from 02/06/2009
5)Chattisgarh 4.5lkh from 24/06/2009
6)A.P 4.0lkh from 04/04/2006
And so on

So My query is that this is violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and
violation of Article 14 in The Constitution Of India 1949 [Constitution] or not ?

Anil

Anonymous   06 June 2010 at 14:55

violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and Article 14 ?

Determine the 'Creamy Layer” amongst SEBCs. (Socially and Educationally Backward Classes)

According to the aforesaid G.R. SSP-1194-KH-109-A-of-01-11-1995 dated 01-11-1995 (Gov. of Gujarat)“income criteria” are to be reviewed and modified every three years or less.

Even though there were clear directions for such review, there was only one review after 9 years in 2004 revising the original limit of Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 2.5 lakh.Since then there is no Change.

NCL/OBC income limit is 4.5 lkh by Government of India,from 2008
NCL/SEBC income limit is 2.5 lkh by Government of Gujarat,from 2004

This is a clear case of violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and
violation of Article 14 in The Constitution Of India 1949 [Constitution]

The protective discrimination in the shape of job,
reservations under the limit to be prescribed
should not be such as to result in
taking away with one hand what is given
with the other. The income limit must
be such as to mean and signify social
advancement.


SEBC income limit for Non-creamy layer certificate in different states of india is as per given below.

1)Kerala 4.5lkh from 05/10/2009
2)Maharastra 4.5lkh from 1/04/2009
3)U.P. 5.0lkh from 20/10/2008
4)M.P. 4.5lkh from 02/06/2009
5)Chattisgarh 4.5lkh from 24/06/2009
6)A.P 4.0lkh from 04/04/2006
And so on

So My query is that this is violation of Article 16(1),16(4)and
violation of Article 14 in The Constitution Of India 1949 [Constitution] or not ?

Anil

Anonymous   06 June 2010 at 07:26

PUBLIC LITIGATION WRIT IN BOMAY HIGH COURT

MY FREIND IS ADIVASI AND TO SAFE GUARD INTEREST OF CAST ON TWO COUNTS ONE CAST IS POOR AND SECOND THERE ARE UNEDUCATED PEOPLE LAW HAS BEEN FORCED THAT LAND OWNED BY ADIVASI CAN NOT SALE FREELY BEFORE TAKING PERMISSION FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
NOW MY FRIEND WHO IS ADIVASI AND WANTS TO DO BUSINESS OF LAND. BOTH CRITERIA AS HE IS A WELL QUALIFIED PERSON AND NOT POOR AS OUT OF HE IS OWN INCOME PURCHASES LAND & WANTS TO DO BUSINESS OF PURCHASE/SALE OF LAND. NOW BECUASE OF SUCH ABSURD LAW HE CAN NOT SALE BEFORE PERMISSION OF STATE GOVERNMENT AND GRANTING PERMISSION TAKES ATLEAST 3 TO 4YEARS
I WANT TO FILE WRIT AND GET JUSTICE PLEASE GUIDE ME AND GIVE YOUR VALUABLE GUIDANCE AND NAME OF BEST ADVOCATED IN SUCH TYPE OF WRITE MATTER WHO KNOWS ADIVASI LAWS PROPERLY

Anonymous   05 June 2010 at 21:00

Article 21

Can anybody plz send me some recent judgments of Supreme Court on Art-21 of the COI!!!AS its required for my term paper some materials on the topic "Supreme Court in protection of Art.21" will be appreciated.

Anonymous   05 June 2010 at 13:21

IPC

Sirs,
Can anyone send me a very short notes on IPC Act and important sections with the punishment for my basic knowledge about IPC.

Member (Account Deleted)   03 June 2010 at 20:09

delay

sir, if there is a violation of article 14 & 16 and a person is delayed in reaching the court for enforcement of fundamental rights; can it be waived off or denied by court?
Is delay and waiver synonym to each other? wt about olga telli's (supra) case, in which it was held that fundamental rights cant be waived off?
what is the normal limitation for approaching to court for enforcement of fundamental rights?

saurabh kaushik   03 June 2010 at 08:14

pardoning power of president under article 72

Can the pardoning power of president to be subject to the Judical review? refer decided cases of supreme court.

Anonymous   02 June 2010 at 16:50

Admission of Writ petition

Ld counsels,

A writ petition is filed by a pubilc authority challenging the RTI order of the infomraiton commission. The high cour has granted a intermi stay of this order and sent notice to me.

During the next hearing is for orders as to admission. Can I submit before the commission verbally that the court should not entertain the writ petition bcos the order of the commission is biding upon the public authrities. The public authorities are denying the applicability of RTI act to their office but as such that offce is not exmpt by the state government.

Without even filing a counter to the petition can I argue that the petition should even be admitted for further hearing and vacate the interim stay.
Is that possible.

Please clarify. Thanks.

Dushyant Pandya   02 June 2010 at 14:43

Retrospective Effect

Can government passed any order with retrospective effect?

If yes, then what about taxes paid?