19-october-2020 to 25-october-2020
NRI Sponsored quota in NLU is of dubious category and Unconstitutional: Orissa HC
Ishika patnaik v. NLU-O & Anr
The Orissa High Court this week observed that the Non-Resident Indian Sponsored (NRIS) quota is “like the reservation for the elite class” and such dubious category of reservation is an “affront to the meritorious candidates who toiled day night to secure seats through CLAT”. The bench said that Elite class students by paying hefty donations, grab the seats of meritorious students which is “unconstitutional”.
By viewing this the Division bench of Justice Sanju Panda and S.K Panigrahi called upon the Bar Council of India and other stakeholders to revisit the process of admission to National Law Universities through this reservation and prepare a proper regulation and system while implementing this quota.
Karnataka HC seeks response from Government on horizontal reservation for Transgenders instead of OBC reservation
Sangama v. state of karnataka & Anr.
The Karnataka High Court has directed the State government to respond to an application which sought that horizontal reservation should be provided to Transgender Persons in Public Employment. This month Government expressed its willingness to provide reservation for transgender community under OBC category.
But the council on behalf of applicant submitted that reservation ought not to be provided under the OBC category but should be provided as a horizontal reservation as a separate special category like the reservation provided for women and persons with disabilities, which can then be interlocked with other social categories of vertical reservation of SC/ST/OBC category.
In INDRA SAWHNEY V. UOI 1992, the hon’ble apex court held that reservations may be either vertical or horizontal. Vertical reservations are social reservations given under Article 16(4) in favourt of sc, sc and obcs, while Horizontal reservations are special reservations, such as, reservations for women, children, disabled persons, ex-army personnel, etc.
SC to examine case related to consumer forum, whether they can entertain complaints against Educational institutions or not
Manu Solanki & Ors. v. Vinayaka Mission University
The Supreme Court has issued notice in an appeal filed against a judgment of National Consumer Redressal Commission which raises the issue that, whether an educational institution or University would be subject to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 2018? The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee, while admitting the appeal, noted that there are divergent views of the Supreme Court on this issue.
Maharshi Dayanand University Vs Surjeet Kaur and P.T. Koshy & Anr. Vs. Ellen Charitable Trust has held that education is not a commodity and educational institutions are not providing any kind of service, and therefore, in matters of admission, fees etc., there cannot be a kind of service therefore, in matters of admission, fee etc., there cannot be a question of deficiency of service.
Anupama College of Engineering Vs. Gulshan Kumar 2017, the commission held that ‘educational institutions’ do not impart ‘services’ and hence the consumer fora does not have jurisdiction to entertain complaints against them.
P. Sreenivasulu & Anr. Vs. P. J. Alexander & Anr., in this case it was observed that Educational Institutions would come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and that Education is a Service.
UN High Commissioner urged Indian government to safeguard rights of Human Rights activists and NGOs
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet appealed to the Government of India to safeguard the rights of human rights defenders and NGOs, and their ability to carry out their crucial work on behalf of the many groups they represent. By citing recent amendments under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act and freezing the bank accounts of NGOs, the UN High Commissioner Bachelet expressed regret as the new regulations tightened the space for human rights NGOs in particular by constraining NGOs’ activities and restrict their foreign funding.
“I urge the Government to ensure that no one else is detained for exercising their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly – and to do its utmost, in law and policy, to protect India’s robust civil society and I also urge the authorities to carefully review the FCRA for its compliance with international human rights standards and to release people charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act for simply exercising basic human rights that India is obligated to protect”, the High Commisioner said.