Introduction

The Constitution of India secures to citizens including disabled, right of justice, freedom of speech & expression, worship, equal status & opportunity. Article 15(1) & 15(2) of the Constitution states that the state & government cannot discriminate against any citizen of India including disabled people on the basis of caste, race, religion or on the basis of any disability. According to 2011 census in India 2.68 Crores persons are disabled (8 types of disability) which constitute 2.21% of the total population of India. Majority are present in the rural areas i.e. 69%. In order to protect the PWDs from alienation various legislation were enacted even though it was seen that the legislations were lacking short in the present times as various disabilities were not listed in the legislations so, the RPWD Act, 2016 was legislated.

Analysis of the Act

The RPWD Act, 2016 attempts to bring the domestic disability legislation in line with the CRPD. The Act was enacted on 28th December 2016, came into force on 19 April 2017. The Act defines disability on the basis of its dynamic & evolving concept rather than limiting the disability unlike the PWD Act, 1995 which it replaced. Thus, the Act has provisions that are rights based rather than the charity or social model of disability. 

The Act has elaborated definitions of concepts like barriers (Section 2 (c)), discrimination (Section 2 (h)), Government establishment (Section 2(k)), Private establishment (Section 2(v)), reasonable accommodation (Section 2(y)) and Special Employment Exchange (Section 2(zb)). Chapter II of the RPWD Act, 2016 deals with the Rights & Entitlements, include the right to equality and non-discrimination (Section 4), rights against exploitation and abuse (Section 7), access to justice (Section 12) etc. Section 5 of the Act makes specific provisions for the women and children with disabilities. A Special provisions have been made in Section 24(3)(d) of the Act which includes schemes for the livelihood for women for the upbringing of their children.

The RPWD Act unlike the PWD Act, 1995 does not define disabilities and limit the number of disabilities & increased the list of disabilities from 7 to 21. The RPWD Act follows the rules of CRPD & defines a person with disability (Section 2(s)) as an individual with long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which in interaction with barrier hinders his complete and effective participation in society equally with others. A person with benchmark disability (for whom there are specific provisions and concessions in work and employment provided by the Act) is a person with disability who has 40% or more of a specified disability.

Other features of the RPWD Act, 2016 

• The term establishment by the Act includes a private establishment as mentioned by Section 2(i). Government Establishment is defined in Section 2(k) which means a corporation established by or under a Central Act or State Act or an authority or a body owned or controlled or aided by the Government or a local authority or a Government company as defined by section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 and includes a Department of the Government. Private establishment according to Section 2(v) of the Act means and includes company, firm, cooperative or other society, associations, agency, institution, organization, union, factory etc., as the appropriate Government may, by notification or notice, specify this clearly means that the disability legislation applies with equal force to private establishments. 

• A public building includes a place of employment of the person. This would go long way thus, benefiting the lives of persons with disabilities easier as these buildings would have to be accessible to persons with disabilities.

• Reasonable Accommodations has been defined & government employers have to provide reasonable accommodation vide Section 20(2) of the Act. Reasonable Accommodation is defined in the same manner as in the rules of CRPD.

• There shall be no discrimination in employment by the Government for PWDs i.e. Section 20(1). Such a clear provision did not existed in the PWD Act, 1995.
• There shall be an Equal Opportunity Policy for every establishment vide Section 21 of the Act. Section 22 mandates maintenance of records and Section 23 has made provision for the appointment of a Grievance Redressal Officer (GRO) to address issues regarding problems in these matters.

• Vocational Training and Self-Employment have been given a push in Section 19 such that the appropriate Government shall formulate schemes & programmes including provision of loans at concessional rates to support & facilitate the employment of persons with disability.

• Provision for Social Security has been made under Section 24 of the Act. Under the PWD Act, 1995 no such provision was present.

• The provision retained from the PWD Act, 1995. Termination or reduction of rank in service of an employee who has acquired a disability is not possible. 

• There is a horizontal reservation provided by the Act of 4% of government jobs and incentive based reservation of jobs in the private sector. The percentage of reservation has gone up by 1%.

• Section 35 of the Act provides incentives to the private sector for employing persons with disabilities. The private sector is under obligation to employ 5% of its workforce consisting of persons with disabilities.

• The Provisions have been made for the setting up of special employment exchanges under Section 37 of the Act.

• Chapter XIII of the Act states that Special Courts & Public Prosecutor shall be provided by the State Governments with Concurrence of the CJ of the High Court vide Section 84 & 85 of the Act.

Citing of RPWD Act, 2016 by Judiciary  

In the case of Vikas v. State of Maharashtra, the Petitioner was a driver of Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) & the respondent no. 3 issued order directing petitioner routine check-up. In the check-up it was diagnosed that the petitioner had Colour Vision Defect (Colour Blindness) thus, terminating his services by MSRTC. The petitioner filed a writ petition pleading that the order of his services termination is the violation of Article 14, 15 & 21 of Constitution & ultra vires to the provision of Section 20 of RPWD Act, 2016. The question before Court was is the petitioner fit to continue his duties with MSRTC with colour blindness. The Court held that the disability viz. Colour Blindness was acquired during the course of his service thus he is entitled to an alternate job as “Reasonable Accommodation” of the provision of Section 20 of RPWD Act, 2016. Court also added as the petitioner services were terminated between the 2018, since then the petitioner is unemployment & nor did they receive any wages or compensation. MSRTC was directed to pay back wages to the petitioner from the date there terms of service was terminated.

In the case of Ebrahim M. M., petitioner attained serious disability during the course of his service & on account of injuries suffered he is entitled to be retained on light duty under Sec. 20 of RPWD Act, 2016 a writ petition was filed by the petitioner with pleading in prayer to issue a writ against the respondent to grant the petitioner equal posting of a conductor in compliance to the Act, 2016. The Court said the writ petition was disposed of but it was ordered accordingly by the Court directing the respondent, within two week on receipt of the judgment the option of petitioner shall be considered sympathetically & due accommodation shall be provided to the petitioner under Sec. 20(2) of the Act, 2016. 

In V. Suresh case, the petitioner while working as a Conductor acquired Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) which disabled him to resume his service as conductor. The petitioner contended to seek assignment of light duty under same pay scale on ground of Sec 20(4) of RPWD Act, 2016 as he acquired the disability during the employment. The Court took reference of the Case of Sajimon K.B., that held that such protection under Sec 20(4) of the Act, 2016 is to be granted & the Corporation cannot contract out of the Statutory Right of the employee thus, stating the petitioner is entitled to be assigned on light duty with protection of pay scale & service benefits.    

Conclusion

The taboo relating to Disability is still very much prevalent in our country, people still treat them as an object of pity and sympathy and treat them as third-class citizens and considers them as a liability which makes the person with disability vulnerable to discrimination like harassment, bullying, mental torture and isolating etc. Therefore, this Act can prove to be a turning point for the PWDs & change the mentality of the society towards disabled persons.

This article is written by Ajay Kataria, from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University, Sonepat, Haryana.

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

Case Number

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2009 OF 2013

Equivalent Citation

AIR 2014 SC 309

Bench

K.S. Radhakrishnan, Pinaki Chandra Ghose

Author of the Judgement-

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Decided on

26 November 2013

 Relevant Act/ Section

Section 2, 3, 12, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act)

Brief Facts and Procedural History

Appellant(unmarried) and Respondent(married and having two kids) were in a live-in relationship for about 18 years. Respondent quit his job and they were earning from the business they set up in her name. Later, R moved work to his home and depriving her of working and earning. He took money from her on various occasions that were never returned, forced her to take contraceptive methods to avoid pregnancy, harassed her by not allowing her to suffix his name, have joint bank accounts, or never even took her to meet his friends or relatives.

Contentions of the Appellant

• Contended that the relationship between them constituted a relationship in the nature of marriage within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the DV Act. 
• Avoided her without providing maintenance.
• She claimed various reliefs under DV Act: –

• Protection Order under Section 18 of the DV Act
• Residence order under Section 19 of the DV Act
• Monetary order under Section 20 of the DV Act
• compensation order under Section 22 of the DV Act to a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- towards damages for misusing the funds of the sister of the appellant, mental torture, and emotional feelings;
• an ex-parte interim order under Section 23 of the DV Act towards medical expenses and a fixed sum as maintenance charges every month.

Contentions of the Respondent

• He denied all the allegations made by the appellant
• He contended that the tests laid down in  D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) were not satisfied as the parties were not qualified to enter into a legal marriage. Also, the appellant knew that the respondent was a married person.

Trial Court-  Took the view that plea of domestic violence was established ( because of considerable time living together and leaving the appellant without maintaining her) and directed the respondent to pay maintenance of a fixed amount every month to the appellant.

Sessions Court- Confirmed the order passed by the learned Magistrate.

High Court- Held that relationship between the parties was not that of relationship in nature of marriage and the tests laid down in D Velusamy case was not satisfied. Hence, the judgments of the lower Courts were set aside. 

Issues before the Supreme Court

1. Whether a live-in relationship would amount to a relationship in nature of marriage within the definition of domestic relationship under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

2. Whether disruption of such a relationship by failure to maintain woman involved in such a relationship amounts to domestic violence under the Act.

Ratio of the Case

1. Sec 2(f) of the DV Act defines domestic relationship as a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family.

2. A relationship in nature of marriage means a relationship that has some inherent, essential characteristics of marriage but is not legally recognized as one. Some of the key differences between marriage and a relationship in nature of marriage are that marriage continues even when the parties are not sharing a household or even when there is a difference of opinion or marital unrest, being based on law but in the other category, the relationship comes to an end when one of the parties determines that he/she does not want to be a part of it anymore. In a relationship in the nature of marriage, the party asserting the existence needs to positively prove the existence by identifying characteristics.

3. Unlike many other countries, live-in relationships have not been socially accepted in India but in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006), it was observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterosexual sex is not an offence though may be considered immoral. Also to provide a remedy in civil law for the women aggrieved in this relationship and to prevent domestic violence, for the first time, DV Act was enacted to cover relationships like the ones in the nature of marriage, by consanguinity, etc.

4. To examine whether a relationship is of the category-a relationship in the nature of marriage is a question of fact and degree and for that, all facets of the interpersonal relation need to be examined. No individual factor can be isolated as there is endless scope for variation in human attitudes and there can be a variety of combinations of factors to be taken into consideration. 

5. Some guidelines (not exhaustive) were laid down to determine whether a live-in relationship falls within the category: –  

• Duration of period of relationship
• Shared household- Defined in Section 2(s) of the DV Act
• Having/planning children- A very strong indicator
• Pooling of Resources and Financial Arrangements Supporting each other, or any one of them
• Sexual relationship- Not just for pleasure but for an emotional and intimate relationship
• Socialization in public- Holding out to the public and socialising with friends and families.
• Intention and conduct of the parties- Common intention of the parties as to what their relationship is to be
• Domestic arrangements entrusting the responsibility- Women to run home and do household chores

6. In the present case, the appellant was aware of the marriage of respondent, hence were living in an adulterous, bigamous relationship, hence they can’t enter into a legal marriage or have a relationship in the nature of marriage. They had no intention to rear kids (3 abortions). No material was adduced to show that they projected themselves as husband-wife in public, or that there were a pooling of resources or financial arrangement between them, or even that they had mutual support and companionship. No evidence that the respondent caused any physical, sexual abuse or endangered her except that of avoiding her without providing maintenance.

Decision of the Court

Since the appellant knew of the respondent’s marriage makes her his mistress and a mistress cannot maintain a relationship in the nature of marriage because such a relationship will not have exclusivity and will not be monogamous in character. If their relationship is to be held as in the nature of marriage then it would be an injustice to the legally wedded wife and their children (they have a cause of action against her for alienating the affection and companionship of parent/husband being an intentional tort). Hence, any conduct, act or omission of the respondent towards the appellant would not amount to domestic violence under Section 3 of the DV Act.

Judgment by the High Court was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.

This case analysis is done by Munmun Kaur, a Law student at Law Centre-I, Faculty of Law, Delhi University.

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

CASE NUMBER

Writ Petition (L) No. 1688 of 2015

BENCH

Justice V.M. Kanade and Justice B.P. Colabawalla

CITATIONS 

2015 SCC ONLINE BOM 8526. 2015 RCR CIVIL 5 156

DECIDED ON

12 June 2015 

RELEVANT ACT/ SECTION

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. 

BRIEF FACTS 

The company was a subsidiary of the Swiss company NESTLE and was engaged in the manufacturing of food goods. For the past 30 years, the Petitioner had been manufacturing and marketing MAGGI, a food product. Certain samples of food goods that were being marketed were examined sometime in May of 2015, first in Utter Pradesh and then in Calcutta when the Petitioner filed an appeal. 

ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT

The order dated 05/06/2015 issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, as well as the order dated 06/06/2015 issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, State of Maharashtra, are being challenged by the petitioner. The petitioner raised contention against respondent’s claim that the products were not standardized and had misleading information. 

RATIO OF THE CASE

The judges said that since the products were being removed from the market and were no longer being marketed, it was not recommended that the procedure for cancelling the production approval that had already been prolonged until the next hearing date. The contested orders were issued without a formal notice of show cause. It was also argued that the abovementioned order was issued by officials that lacked the authority to issue such orders. However, the respondents argued that they had the liberty of taking immediate action against the company in case of any emergency in the form of threat to public, health, etc. 

DECISION OF THE COURT

The topic of granting a stay to the impugned orders did not arise at that time because the Petitioner had stated that the Petitioner – Company had already decided to remove its product from the market despite their statement that the product was safe for human consumption.  Respondents, on the other hand, were free to take any legal action they saw fit against the Petitioner if they believed the aforementioned statement had not been followed. They will do so after giving the Petitioner 72 hours’ notice. If the Maggi product is discovered with shops or others, they had the right to take it.

This case analysis is authored by Vanshika Samir, a first-year student at the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala, Punjab. 

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

Theme of the Competition

 Any Contemporary legal Issue.

Mode

Online

Eligibility 

The Competition is open for Students pursuing/completed Graduation/Post Graduation from any recognized University across the country or academicians, Professionals, Scholars of any background.

Co-authorship: up-to two authors are permitted.

Important Dates

Last date of registration: 25th August, 2021

Last date of submission Article (via mail): 28th August, 2021

Date of Result announcement: 1st September, 2021

Prizes

1. 1st Prize: 500 INR, 2nd Prize: 300 INR, 3rd Prize: 100 INR
2. Free publication in a book bearing ISBN number for Top 3.
3. 15 percent off in online courses by KATOG for all the participants.
4. Discounted publication opportunities for all the participants.
5. Online Internship Opportunity at Law Essentials for Top 3.

Registration Procedure & Payment Info

Registration Form: https://forms.gle/BtwDsmKCJtTR42GB8

Fee:

Single Authored: 100 INR

Co-Authored: 150 INR

Phonepe/paytm/Phonepe: 9632322022

For bank transfers –
Account Holder’s Name: Mohammed Farhan C
Account No.: 5845116169
IFSC Code: KKBK0008043
UPI Handle: 9916553337@kotak

Submission Guidelines

1. All the participants are required to submit their manuscripts through registration form/mail at lawessentials1234@gmail.com by 28th August, 2021.
2. The article must be submitted in the English language only.
3. Entries can be co-authored. However, a maximum of two authors per entry is allowed.
4. Times New Roman font, in font size 12 is prescribed for all entries. Further, footnotes shall be in font size 10 and in Times New Roman font.
5. A line spacing of 1.5 for the main text and 1.0 for footnotes should be followed.
6. All submissions should be in doc or docx format; submissions in pdf shall not be accepted.
7. Manuscripts should be minimum of 1000 words.
8. The submissions must be original works and should not have been published elsewhere.
9. The submission should be free from all grammatical & spelling errors.
10. Any standard format can be used for footnotes (Bluebook/APA/MLA etc..).
11. The footnotes shall be in Times New Roman font, the font size 10, and line spacing of 1.0.
12. In all matters related to the Competition, the decision of the Law Essentials India & JLSR shall be final and conclusive.

Contact Details:

lawessentials1234@gmail.com

jflsrjournal@gmail.com

WhatsApp on 9136804644/9632322022 for any queries.

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

1. SML tax chamber is looking at recruiting Juniors and Interns / Paralegals on long term basis

SML tax chamber are looking at recruiting Juniors and Interns / Paralegals on long term basis – who aspire to become Tax Counsels and who also have some interest in academic work.

Eligibility-Juniors

1) Advocates who
a) are qualified CAs or have completed articleship in tax under the CA curriculum or
b) have relevant tax experience

OR

2) CAs having tax experience during their articleship or post qualification and pursuing or willing to pursue LL.B

Eligibility-Interns / Paralegals

Commerce graduates or Inter CAs pursuing LL.B

Candidates having good articulation with drafting / research skills would be preferred. Good knowledge of or exposure to International Tax / Transfer Pricing would be a plus point.

Interested candidates may mail their CV to office@smltaxchamber.com

If the candidate has written any article or made summaries of judgments or drafted any submissions etc the same (post sanitisation, if required) may also be mailed.

If you wish to know more, you may log on to their website www.smltaxchamber.com

2. Job Opening: Assistant Manager, In- House counsel; Viatris

Role – Assistant Manager, In- House counsel
Required experience – 2 to 4 years in corporate
Qualification- LL.B/LL.M
Work location – Hyderabad

We are looking for candidates who can join immediately or with short notice period. Interested candidates please send your resumes to pavantanaynag.voruganti@viatris.com

3. Sigma Legal Group is hiring full time Advocates for its Delhi office

Location: New Delhi
Salary: As per industry standards

About Sigma Legal

Sigma Legal Group is a leading law firm dealing in NCLT, Civil, IPR, Criminal, Commercial and CS matters. It has a team of experienced and expert professionals working across the country.

Sigma Legal is looking to hire Advocates in two categories:
First: 2-4 years of experience with specialization in IBC, NCLT matters, Corporate Drafting and Misc. Court litigations
Second: Fresher with 0-2 years of experience in various litigation matters and drafting.

Candidates can apply by sharing their CVs on career@sigmalegal.in with the subject ‘First Category’ or ‘Second Category’.

Last date- 28th July,2021 after which no resumes shall be entertained

4. Job Opportunity: Legal Associate (Corporate law); Conducive Legal LLP

Experience: 1.5 – 2.5 years in a Small to mid-size law firm

Location: East Delhi Broad Job

Description:

1. Drafting of Commercial Agreements, Deeds, Legal Notices and Petitions.

2. Should be able to assist in Mergers and Acquisitions

3. Should be able to assist in Labor and Environmental Law matters

4. Should be able to assist in JV’s and Private Equity Transaction

5. Preparing case summary and doing related searches.

Requirements:

1. Should be Bachelor of Laws (LLB)

3. Should have knowledge on Corporate Laws, Commercial Laws

4. Excellent problem solving, analytical and organizational skills

5. Excellent interpersonal and communication skills

6. Excellent writing and communication skills in English;

Perks:
A competitive remuneration plan and an excellent working environment.

Mail your CVs @ conducivelegal@gmail.com

5. Job Opportunity: Advocate Prabal Goel is Looking to recruit legal professionals

Looking to recruit legal professionals with 2+ years of experience in financial and debt recovery laws. Candidates may get in touch with me through email sent at goel.prabal@gmail.com. People with no experience in stated domains may kindly refrain from applying. Location:- Bangalore

6. A well reputed dynamic and boutique law firm is looking to hire lawyers for their Bangalore, Delhi and Mumbai office

Requirement:
1. IBC Litigation – 6+ years PQE
2. Corporate M&A – 3 – 8 years PQE

Interested candidates can reach out on LinkedIn or can share resume on srishti@wrootsglobal.in

7. A top production house is looking to hire a legal associate

Qualification: LLB with 1 year of experience (Contracts, compliance & Litigation) + Media law experience
Location: Mumbai
CTC: As per market standards.

If you feel you fit the profile, please send in your resume to shashank.gupta@symlaw.ac.in.

8. Internship Opportunity at KZJ Partners

KZJ_Partners requires one intern interested in litigation.

This is a physical internship.

Interested law students may send their CV at paras@kzjpartners.com.

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

Supreme Court on Friday Stated that India cannot have two parallel legal systems out of which one for the influential and rich people and another one for the poor.

This was stated by Supreme Court in a Murder case of Congress leader Devendra Chaurasia of Madhya Pradesh where the High Court has granted bail to the accused who is the husband of a Madhya Pradesh BSP legislator. The accused Mr. Govind Singh was arrested in the accusation Congress leader in March, there are also another 28 Criminal cases registered against him and Singh was granted bail by the High court.

When the apex court came to know about it took up the matter and the bench comprising of justices D Y Chandrachud and Hrishikesh Roy had observed the case. It has been noted that the accused has been protected by the police because of its power and influence and so put aside an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which has granted bail to Mr. Singh. Along with bench also said that existing of two different legal systems will decline the legality and validity of the law.

The apex court also jogs the court memory of the state that is not their duty to protect the politicians or come under their pressure just because they are influential.

-Report by RIDDHI DUBEY

Recently, the Union Ministry of Law and Justice had notified parliament that there are in total 453 vacant seats of Judges in different High Courts across the Country.

The list of vacant seats of Judges goes like this Allahabad High Court has 66 vacancies, Bombay High court has 31, Calcutta High Court has 41, Delhi High Court 30, Madhya Pradesh has 24, and Gujarat High Court 24, Punjab & Haryana 39, and Rajasthan High court has 27 vacancies. The Himachal High Court has had no Justices since 1st July and whereas Sikkim, Manipur, and Meghalaya have no vacancy.

Justifying this situation Law Minister Kiren Rijiju stated in his reply to Rajya Sabha that filling up such vacancies is a continuous, integrated, and collaborative process and as it is a long process so it takes time. Efforts are been made to fill up these vacancies and always new vacancies are coming up and it’s also the reason for vacancies not been filled. It was also stated that various recommendation was made by Supreme court Collegium which was around 80 names out of which 45 have been appointed and rest are still pending in the process.

Supreme Court stated that various orders have been passed by a different bench to fill up this High Court never-ending vacancies still are pending and it is ordered to fill it up in reasonable time.

-Report by RIDDHI DUBEY

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

Journal for Law Students and Researchers [JLSR]  is an Online Journal with ISSN[O]: 2582-306X and 8 indexings, which is quarterly, Peer-Reviewed, published online and JLSR seeks to provide an interactive platform for the publication of Short Articles, Long Articles, Book Reviews, Case Comments, Research Papers, Essays in the field of Law.

JLSR welcomes contributions from all legal branches, as long as the work is original, unpublished, unplagiarized and is in consonance with the submission guidelines.

NATURE OF CONTRIBUTIONS

• Articles: An article must conduct a complete analysis of the area of law, which the author seeks to highlight. It must contain a comprehensive study of the existing law with the suggestions and conclusions of the Author. Word Limit being 1,100 to 4,000 words.
• Notes: A note is a relatively concise form of an argument advanced by the author. The focus of a note should be on a relatively new debate or controversy regarding the interpretation or implementation in the law. Notes shall primarily highlight contemporary issues, which need to be addressed, and the authors are expected to offer a solution. The maximum word limit for a manuscript in the form of note is 1,500-2,500 words.
• Comments: A comment is where the author may decide to critique any recent/landmark judicial pronouncement or any recent legislation or bill before the Parliament or State Legislature. The word limit for a comment is 2,000-3,000 words.
• Book Review: A Book Review is where the author identifies the central idea of the book, gives the reader indication of the author’s style, approach, or premises, and then offers an overall evaluation adding suggestions and latest amendments to the given laws in the book. The word limit is from 2,000-3,000 words.

DATES

• Last date for full paper submission: 1st September, 2021 (Submissions should be made in Word Doc.)
• Intimation of the selection of Full Paper: Within 3 days of submission.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

1. Citation Format: The citation format to be followed is The Bluebook (19th Ed.)/Any Standard Format.
2. Abstract: Every submission should be accompanied by an abstract of 250-300 words describing the relevant conclusions drawn in the manuscript.
3. Papers with plagiarism less than 25% are only eligible for publication.
4. Font Style: Times New Roman and font size 12.

PUBLICATION FEE

Single Authored: 800/-

Co-Authored: 1000/-

Note : Payment to be made only after selection and not before.

MODE OF SUBMISSION

Submission of the full article/paper along shall be made by sending an e-mail at editor.jlsr@gmail.com.

CONTACT INFORMATION

9136804644

E-mail: jflsrjournal@gmail.com

The website link is here.

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

A petition to the Supreme Court has been filed to establish the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Appellate Tribunal. The case, which is expected to be heard soon, claims that the tribunal has not been established even though the Central Goods and Services Act has been in effect for four years.

It was stated that in the absence of a Tribunal, citizens who have been wronged are forced to contact their respective high courts, which is overburdening the work of the high courts. “In the absence of an Appellate Tribunal, litigants are unable to obtain justice within a reasonable timeframe, creating significant hardship to litigants across the country,” according to the PIL filed by advocate Amit Sahni.

It stated that the creation of national and other Appellate Tribunal benches has become an imperative necessity of the hour and that the respondents cannot delay its establishment indefinitely. It further stated that the period of limitation to file an appeal before the tribunal, which is 90 days, cannot be extended by the Centre by administrative order in violation of statutory rules, and that such an extension cannot be granted indefinitely.

In the plea, the following assertions are made:

• The petitioner pointed out that under the CGST Act, anyone who is dissatisfied by an order issued by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 or the Revisional Authority under Section 108 has three months to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 112. Despite the presence of such a clear legal mandate, the Centre has taken no action to establish a National Bench or other Appellate Tribunal Benches.
• The petitioner also claimed that the Department of Revenue had stated in response to a catena of representations filed by aggrieved litigants that the reason for the delay in forming the Appellate Tribunal was because the Madras High Court had ordered the Central government to amend the CGST Act in the case of Revenue Bar Association v. Union Of India and Consider appointing lawyers with more than 10 years of experience as Judicial Members of the Tribunal’s National and Other Benches.

-Report by YASHVARDHAN SHARMA

In Association with:

• Gujarat International Maritime Arbitration Centre (GIMAC)
• Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB)
• Centre for Public International Law, Gujarat National Law University (GNLU)

Gujarat Maritime University

Gujarat Maritime University, is a bespoke institution for the advancement of Maritime education and research in India. The prime objective of the University is to be a global centre of excellence in maritime education, research, and training. It aims to enhance and increase the human capital and capacity of the maritime industry both in India and across the globe.

The University began its academic journey in the year 2019 and has established two schools so far namely, School of Maritime Law, Policy and Administration, and School of Maritime Management. Moreover, various centres including the Centre for Executive Education, Centre for Maritime Dispute Resolution, Centre for Maritime Legal Studies, Centre for Maritime Labour Law, Centre for Maritime Environmental Law and the Centre for Post-Graduate Legal studies have also been established. The University offers Diploma Programmes in law with specialisations in Maritime Law and International Trade Law. The University also offers short term Executive Developments Programmes specially designed for working professionals.

International Conference on Maritime Dispute Resolution

Centre for Maritime Dispute Resolution, Gujarat Maritime University takes immense pride in announcing its First Annual  International Conference on Maritime Dispute Resolution. The Conference intends to act as an intellectual and productive knowledge-sharing space for all academia, researchers, students, industrialists, and enthusiasts of Maritime Law.

• About the Conference

Ships are the largest man-made moving objects on the the earth. About 90% of the goods are moved using these ships. The largest moving objects, carrying almost all kinds of cargo and undertaking dangerous voyages, ships are capable of causing huge damages, financial losses, and breaching laws nationally and internationally. Under most systems of law, the person amenable to a dispute arising out of a ship is the owner and demise-charterer, which is usually a company. The company may have been incorporated in any part of the world and having tangible assets other than the ship, which might be mortgaged. Hence, it makes adjudication of maritime legal disputes by litigation a complicated process. Further, Arbitration is also now a usual mechanism resorted to resolve maritime disputes and is being seen as more effective and expeditious than litigation but remains dominated only by few nations and comes with its limitations. Therefore, Gujarat Maritime University strives to bring to light various intricacies of Maritime Dispute Resolution through the International Conference on Maritime Dispute Resolution by providing a platform to researchers, scholars, academicians, professionals, and students to showcase their research.

Themes:

Gujarat Maritime University invites researchers, scholars, academicians, professionals, and students to present their research on the following themes:

1. The Settlement of Disputes under United Nations Law of the Sea Convention, 1982
2. State’s Obligations to settle Disputes Peacefully
3. Compulsory Dispute Resolution Procedures and Binding Decisions
4. ITLOS – Contentious, Non-Contentious, and Advisory Opinion
5. ICJ as a Dispute Settlement Forum for Maritime Disputes
6. Arbitration and Special Arbitration
7. Disputes pertaining to Delimitation, Navigation, Marine Environment, Prompt Release, Fisheries, etc.
8. Any other allied area related to the theme of the session.
9. Admiralty Jurisdiction
10. Subject Matter Admiralty Jurisdiction
11. Exercise of Maritime Jurisdiction
12. Admiralty Jurisdiction in rem and in Personam
13. Ship Arrest and Lein
14. Any other allied area related to the theme of the session
15. Maritime Claims
    1. Procedure in an Admiralty Claim in Rem
    1. Ownership, Possession, Sale, Mortgage, Charge, and Maritime Lien
    1. Wages and Service Disputes of Seafarers
    1. Collision Claims
    1. Pollution Claims
    1. Limitation Claims
    1. Order of Priority
    1. Protection of Owner, Charterer, Manager, Operator, and Crew of Arrested Vessel
    1. Any other allied area related to the theme of the session
16. Maritime Arbitration
17. Wet and Dry Shipping Dispute
18. Preferred Seat for Maritime Arbitration
19. Lex Maritima in the Changing World (with a reference to the influence of Jus Commune in Arbitration Law and Conflict of Laws)
20. Role of National Courts in Maritime Arbitration
21. Contemporary Challenges faced by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the Comité Maritime International (CMI)
22. Any other allied area related to the theme of the session
23. Future of Dispute Resolution
24. Online Dispute Resolution ODR; e-ADR;  Virtual and e-Courts as per by NITI Aayog, 2020 initiative and its relevance in Maritime Dispute Resolution
25. SAROD-Ports (Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes – Ports, 2020)
26. Growing Infrastructure Investment Dispute and the Need for Bespoke Dispute Resolution Mechanism
27. Oceans, Climate Change and the Rights-Based Disputes
28. Any other allied area related to the theme of the session

Awards:

There will be one award for the best paper under each theme carrying a cash prize of INR 10,000/- and a certificate of appreciation. In case there are more than 10 papers recieved under a particular theme, a second prize shall be declared for that theme. The second prize will be carrying a cash prize of INR 5000/- and a certificate of appreciation.

Criteria for awarding best paper:

• Originality

Originality of contribution to knowledge with an emphasis on the paper’s innovativeness in one or more of;

1. theoretical development,
2. results and findings or,
3. policy development
4. Quality of Argument

Quality of argument incorporating; critical analysis of concepts and consistency and coherency of debate.

• Positioning

Clear positioning of paper in existing literature with a conclusion(s) that is both convincing and of significant potential.

• Writing Style

Quality of writing style in terms of accuracy, clarity, readability, and organisation of the paper.

Registration fees:

There shall be no registration fees.

Who can attend:

The conference is open to academicians, students, practitioners, personnel working within the maritime sector, stakeholders of the sector, and anyone interested in the subject area.

Certification:

All the presenters and participants will be provided with certificates of participation.

Tentative Dates for the Conference: 29^th and 30^th October 2021

Call for Abstracts: 15^th July 2021

Last date for Abstract submission: 31^st August 2021

Confirmation of Acceptance: 10^th September 2021

Last date of registration: 15^th October 2021

Submission of full paper: 10^th October 2021

Submission of PowerPoint presentation (optional): 25^th October 2021

Submission Guidelines:

1. Word Limit for Abstract submission: 150-200 words.
2. Abstract to be submitted via Google Form on the following link (Please note- The abstract should be attached in word file format):

https://forms.gle/vEbiyMAKajndTrFc6

• During the submission of the abstract, the abstract should be saved by the name of the participant, Theme No. and Sub-theme. For example, ‘Harsha Dave Theme III A’Word limit for Paper: 2000-5000 words
• The Paper shall have an introduction, main body, and conclusion.
• The cover page of the research paper shall consist of the following:
• Title of the Research paper,
• Theme,
• Sub-theme,
• Details of the author: Name, Designation, Mobile No., Email ID, Postal Address.
• The referencing style shall be Bluebook 20^th Edition.
• Formatting shall be as follows
• Font: Times New Roman
• Line Spacing: 1.5
• Border: 1′ all sides
• Title (Cover page) : 16 font-size
• Sub titles, Theme and Sub theme (Cover page) : 14 font-size
• Text (Main content) : 12 font-size
• Footnote : 10 font-size
• Heading 1: 16 font-size (first letter of the word in Uppercase)
• Heading 2: 14 font-size (first letter of the word in capital)
• Headings 3: 12 font-size (Italics)
• Co-authorship is allowed up to two authors only.
• Formatting and grammatical errors may lead to the disqualification of the paper outrightly.
• All the papers shall be subject to the similarity index test.

Registration link:

https://forms.gle/BC2ctzPeFZ2Sbqof6

• Conference Patron: Prof. (Dr.) S. Shanthakumar, Director(I/C), Gujarat Maritime University & Director, Gujarat National Law University.
• Conference Convenor: Mr. Waseem Ahmad Bhat, Assistant Professor, Gujarat Maritime University.
• Conference Co-convenor: Ms. Vishwa Bhatt, Teaching and Research Associate, Gujarat Maritime University

How to Apply?

For any query, please feel free to contact the organizing committee: cmdr@gmu.edu.in or call us +917923270517 (all working days 9 AM – 5 PM).

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/KPrsJcjTDqjIGDX3zVVNLM

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd▲