Dhanraj
06 April 2017 at 12:05
Sir/Madam,
What relationship does exist between people and the government of india? Is is master servant relationship or princiapl agent relationship?
Chirag Mehta
05 April 2017 at 18:38
Respected sir,
My name is chirag. My father was died during his job. Now please guide me to get benifites which are eligible for our family.
One home loan is running on his name. Is that loan will be waived or will be continue even after his death?
vivek patil
02 April 2017 at 15:25
SIR I AM HAVING APPROX.600SQ MTR OF LAND ALONG WITH 2 STORYIED STRUCTURE WHICH IS ANCESTRAL PROPERTY.SITUATED IN MUMBAI WESTERN SUBURB.I AM PAYING N.A. TAX FOR THE SAME SINCE LAST MORE THAN 35 YEARS. NOW SUDDENLY FROM TAHASILDAR OFFICE THEY ARE SAYING SINCE IN OUR RECORD IT IS SHOWING AS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY BUT WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THIS IS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SO YOU WILL HAVE TO PAY ITS COMMERCIAL RATE SINCE BACKDATED.I HAVE RECEIVED THIS LAND FROM MY LATE FATHER AND IT IS SINCE BEGINING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. IF GOVT.OFFICE IS HAVING WRONG RECORD.WHAT CAN I DO.IN THIS CASE. CLEARK FROM THAT OFFICE IS SAYING I WILL HAVE TO PAY HEAVY PENALTY ALONG WITH 30 YEARS ARREARS OF TAX IS IT TRUE. CAN SOMEBODY ADVICE PLEASE.I WILL BE GREATFUL.
rahul
27 March 2017 at 18:29
By “the constitution (scheduled tribes) order amendment act”, the Hindi meaning of a scheduled tribes had been changed.(consequently issuance of ST Cast Certificate to this caste had been closed and this cast had been put under obc list) Recently this constitution (scheduled tribes) order amendment act had been repealed by the central government .on this repealing , different opinion has been arisen on the hindi meaning of this scheduled tribes between central government and state government . state government ‘s view point is, since the amending order has been repealed consequently the situation before amendment is restored and ordered to its officials vide its official gazette to issue ST certificate in state and central format to caste listed before amendment.
Whereas the central government is of opinion that no changes have been made by repealing of the said amendment by virtue of saving clause of the repealing Act ,which is as under.
“The repeal by this Act of any enactment shall not affect any other enactment in which the repealed enactment has been applied, incorporated or referred to-----“
Sir on the basis of above facts my question is:-
1)What is the status of beneficiary of this ST certificate in the eye of law who applied cast certificate on the basis of state government order and gets benefit of this ST certificate?, if he is not aware about different opinion on the hindi meaning of this scheduled tribes between central government and state government at the time of taking benefit of this certificate.
Nagaraju
23 March 2017 at 21:59
Dear expert
Need to know procedure for appointing tribunal members who participate in disposals of revenue disputes chaired by Ac or thahasildar
Arvind
20 March 2017 at 15:11
Sir
I am given to understand that any person following the Sikh religion can carry a kirpan or sword as per their religious beliefs.
However when a sikh by birth cuts his hair short then can he or she carry a kirpan or sword as per law.
Please clarify.
Arvind
salamat
12 March 2017 at 11:31
Dear All,
Thanks for your continuous support. My query is .. is there any provision in law or power to court about re election if a pil is filed representing voters whose name where deleted without information and without proper reason if yes hiw many such voters should be there to do so.
Madhu Mittal
10 March 2017 at 15:40
As per Income tax section 55 2 iiia cost of bonus shares is to be taken nil w.e.f 01.04.1996.
Now finance act 2017, Further, for assets purchased before 1st April 2001, the cost of acquisition is either the fair market value of the asset as on 1st April 2001 or the actual cost, at the option of the Assessee.
So now from 01.04.2017 if bonus shares is allotted in 1999, the cost of acquisition can be taken fair market value of the asset as on 1st April 2001.
If Yes and my understanding is correct, whether it is constitutional that bonus shares are treated differently as far as cost of acquisition is related.
Mathre Rangarajan
07 March 2017 at 19:39
Dear Sirs,
I draw your kind attention to Supreme Court 5 judge constitutional bench judgment in 1982 in D S Nakra & others Vs Union of India - copy attached
1. Highlight of this judgment is that "all retirees are one class under Article 14, 15 and 21 of Constitution, they cannot be divided based on date of joining and date of retirement and any new benefit given at a later date should be extended to all previous retirees to maintain integrity.
2. Is this constitutional provision is applicable to retirees of Central Public Sector Enterprises also as they are also Central Government employees (Quasi Govt)?
3. Department of Public Enterprises, Government of India, vide their letter No W-0001/2017-DPE(WC) dated 9th February 2017 (copy attached) says that retirees of Central Public Sector Enterprises are divided into distinct two groups based on their retirement (01-01-2007) - First group people who are going to retire after 01-01-2007 gets pension and post retirement medical benefits and second group people retired before 01-01-2007 will not get that benefit.
4. Is this not breach of 1982 judgement of Supreme Court?
5. Can I file a Contempt of Supreme Court case to get justice?
warm regarads
M Rangarajan
retired group general manager (ONGC)
B 2-301, Sriram Spandhana,
Challaghatta,
Bangalore -5600037
mobile: 9945091581
email: rangajan1@gmail.com
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
moot problem
Human Rights International v . Union of India
1) The erstwhile territory of � British India � was divided , and under the provisions of the Indian Independence Act , 1947, passed by the British Parliament , India and Pakistan were established. The said Act , under Section 7 (1 ) (b ), also terminated the treaties or agreements ending British Paramountcy over the Native Indian States namely Kashmir, Mysore , Hyderabad , etc .
2 )In pursuance of the end of British Paramountcy, the Maharaja of Kashmir acceded to India ; Pakistan , however, contested the accession . The resulting hostility between the two nations led predictably to the wars of 1948 , 1965 , and 1971. In a bid to resolve issues peacefully , the Shimla Accord of 1972 was signed .
3) Subsequently , terrorists started attacking India and during the last two decades , about 20 , 000 people were killed and large numbers were injured. The arrest of a number of these terrorists and other information collected by the intelligence agencies indicated that these terrorists were trained in Pakistan . India protested against such trainings and requested Pakistan , through diplomatic channels, to deal with the perpetrators of the crime . However , terrorist activities remained unabated. The most dastardly was the terrorist strike on November X , 2016 in Mumbai which killed more than 200 people and maimed and injured several others.
4) Responding to the huge public out cry and detailed coverage in the media, the Indian Parliament debated the matter extensively . The US response to 9 / 11 incident was considered. It was finally decided to pass the Trial of Cross- Border Terrorists Act , 2016 [Act no X of 2016] .
5) Section 2 declared � cross- border terrorist acts� as � acts of war � and such a terrorist , as an � enemy alien� . Section 3 defined a � cross-border terrorist � as a person coming from Pakistan who commits an act of terrorism killing or injuring persons intentionally . Section 4 provided for the appointment of an �Investigating Officer� . Section 5 enumerated the powers of the investigating officer, which , inter alia included detention of suspected cross- border terrorists in their custody or camp till the end of their trial. Section 6 made confessions as admissible evidence . Section 7 placed the onus of proving his innocence on the accused cross- border terrorist . Section 8 provided for the establishment of a Special Security Tribunal headed by the Judge Advocate General to try the accused cross- border terrorist . Section 9 permitted legal representation for the accused cross border terrorist . Section 10 mandated full opportunity to the accused cross border terrorist to defend his innocence . Section 11 mandated the holding of proceedings in camera and completion of the trial within 3 months from the date of framing of charges or transfer. Section 12 prescribed minimum punishments which included life sentence . Section 13 barred the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or any other Court against the conviction or sentence passed by the Special Security Tribunal. Section 12 mandated that the orders of the Tribunal be made public. Section 14 required transfer of all pending cases relating to the cross- border terrorists to the Special Security Tribunal . Sec.15 empowered the Central Government to make rules regulating the procedure of trial and incidental matters.
6) The Human Rights International headed by an Indian challenged the constitutional validity of the Act of 2016 under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court . The division bench of the Court issued notice and referred the matter to the Constitution Bench to decide the question as to whether the Trial of the Cross Border Terrorists Act , 2016 is constitutionally valid.
WHAT ARE THE LAWS APPLICABLE TO THIS CASE AND HOW SHOULD I START WORKING FOR THIS CASE.