Author: LEXPEEPS editor

-Report by Rhea Mistry

The High court of Himachal Pradesh in Rakesh Kumar v. the State of Himachal Pradesh said that daughter of the family does not cease to be a member of the family just because she gets married, she is still considered a member of the family.

The petitioner Rakesh Kumar is the son of his deceased father Khajana Ram who served as a Beldar in the Arki Division of Himachal Pradesh Public Works Department perpetually. He passed away while working on 17th May 2015. His son, the petitioner, Rakesh Kumar after his father’s demise applied for a job through the government’s policy of obtaining on compassionate grounds.

In 2008, the petitioner applied for a job that got rejected by the government for the reason that he did not fulfill the financial income criteria which are provided by the government by Department of Personnel regulations. The mother of the petitioner followed with an application to the authorities on the same compassionate grounds for a job. After that, the petitioner again applied for the job on compassionate grounds but through the Right to Information Act, he came to know this application was also rejected. Thereafter, he filed the present petition.

During the petition, it came forward that the deceased has left behind four members of the family, i.e., his widow, two sons, and one married daughter. Calculating the family income at that time was Rs. 95,122/- from the income certificate given by the tehsildar on 11th September 2013.

For a family of four or more with dependents, the annual income should be Rs. 1,25,000-with an individual income of Rs. 31,250/- per annum. In the petitioners’ case, the individual income was Rs. 31,707. The claim was rejected stating that the petitioner is not judged as poor.

After the death of the father, when the petitioner applied for the job the income of the family from all the sources was Rs. 33,800/- as per the income certificate which was issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The pension was received by the family and including that, the annual income went to Rs. 53,280/-. According to the Notings, the annual income
of the family was judged to be under the prescribed limit of Rs. 75,000/- considering the three members of the family i.e., the wife and two sons. The Finance Department rejected the petitioners’ application because he did not suffice the financial criteria prescribed by the government.

The court heard the contentions made by the petitioner and the learned additional advocate general and said that the rejection of the petitioner’s application was a bit “harsh”. The court also stated that the individual income is Rs.31,707/- when the limit is Rs. 31,250/- because it is more than Rs. 450/-, and the petitioner’s application is rejected. If the income would have been Rs. 31,250/-, then the petitioner was eligible for application on compassionate grounds.

The court observed that while considering the family income and members, the daughter was not counted as a family member as she was married. They stated that when a girl gets married, she loses a title in two ways, one is she loses a title as a family member from her family and the other is she loses a title from her in-law’s family for the purpose that she cannot be considered a family member for assessing the annual income. The court found this “arbitrary” and “discriminatory”.

There is no reason why a daughter should not be counted as a family member while calculating family income. The court said that if they approve the standards issued by the government, it will become a party for gender discrimination. So, the Himachal Pradesh High Court asserted that while calculating family income, the daughter must be considered a member of the family. She will not cease to be a member of the family merely because she is married.

In this case, the family income is to be assessed with four members and not three. After calculating the income with four members, it comes to less than Rs. 31,250/- and so allowed the petition. The respondents are ordered to offer the appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds on his qualifications. The court also said that the appointment of the petitioner is said to be notional for all purposes and intents including monetary and actual benefits and shall accrue from the date of appointment of the petitioner which shall be made up to 15th July 2022.
With this, the petition was disposed of.

CITATION

1992 AIR 1858, 1992 SCR (3) 658

APPELLANT

Miss Mohini Jain     

RESPONDENT

State Of Karnataka And Ors.

BENCH

Kuldip Singh (J)

DECIDED ON

30 July, 1992

ACTS/SECTIONS

Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 41, 45-Right to Education, Karnataka Educational  Institutions  (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1984 ( Section 3)

BRIEF FACTS

Mohini Jain was a young lady initially from Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, and needed to seek after MBBS from a confidential school in Karnataka named Sri Sriddharatha Medical College, Agalokote, Tumkur. As per the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, it was laid out by the state government that Private Medical Colleges will charge just ₹2000 per annum from understudies conceded on Government seats, ₹25,000 from understudies from the territory of Karnataka and ₹60,000 from understudies of the other states in India. Aside from this, no expense ought to be requested from the understudy. This step was taken to guarantee that the Private Medical Colleges don’t charge cash from understudies in return for affirmation.

The administration of the school illuminated her that she would need to present an amount of ₹60,000 for each year however her dad passed on to the specialists that ₹60,000 is an enormous measure of cash and he was unable to manage the cost of that. On this premise, she was denied confirmation in the school. Miss Jain later affirmed that separated from the ₹60,000 the school likewise requested ₹4,50,000 as a capitation charge however this was denied by the school.

The Respondents guaranteed that she was approached to pay a measure of Rs. 60,000, and thusly, the Management got a call from the Petitioner’s dad who pronounced that he didn’t possess the ability to pay the extreme sum.

The Petitioner guaranteed that she was approached to pay an extra amount of around four and a half lakhs as capitation expense, which was denied by the Respondents energetically. Ms. Jain recorded a request under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution testing the notice of the Karnataka Legislature that considers requesting such excessive sums from understudies for the sake of educational cost.

The appeal guaranteed that the warning was violative of Articles 12, 14, 21, and 41 of the Indian Constitution as it conspicuously denied the Right to training to Indian residents on an erratic premise. The expense charged could without much of a stretch be recognized as a capitation charge. It was, in this manner, violative of Section 3 of the Act and against the excellencies of Right to Equality and Right to Education.

ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT

• Whether the Right to Education is ensured to the residents of India in consonance with Fundamental Rights, and whether charging a capitation expense infracts something similar?
• Whether the charging of capitation expense is violative of the fairness statement cherished in Article 14?
• Whether the criticized warning allowed the charging of a capitation expense dishonestly?
• Whether the notice is violative of the arrangements of the Act restricting the charging of such expenses?

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

The Petitioner battled that the burden of such colossal charges for training by the confidential school is against the different articles under the Indian Constitution.

For this situation, the Respondent battled at first that the rules which have been continued in the confidential school with respect to the capitation expenses are not chargeable from those understudies who were equipped for the Government situates yet just from those understudies who were from various classes. They additionally contended that as they were following such grouping of seats in the school under merit list or under nonmeritorious list, which suggests that Government seats for up-and-comers who were under merit rundown and other people who were not. Accordingly, the administration leading group of the school has the option to charge expenses from the individuals who didn’t go under the legitimacy list.

One more contention by the Respondent was that as they were a confidential clinical school and there was no monetary guide which was given from the public authority Karnataka or the focal government furthermore basically these confidential clinical universities used to cause 5 Lakh Rupees as use for MBBS course. Ultimately, they additionally battled that the confidential clinical universities have consistently observed the Guideline of regulation and submitted to every one of the regulations for the smooth working of the organization and were legitimate in charging the capitation expenses.

HELD

After hearing the contentions from both the gatherings the Apex Court held that however the Right to Education isn’t explicitly referenced as a Fundamental Right; Articles 38, 39(a), (f), 41, and 45 of the Indian Constitution, it is clarified that the of the constitution makes it required for the State to instruct its residents. Article 21 of the constitution peruses “No individual will be denied of his life or individual freedom besides as indicated by the technique laid out by regulation”. Under Article 21 of the constitution and a singular’s poise can’t be guaranteed except if he has a Privilege of Education and taught himself. Further, the Court thought about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by the United Nations and a few cases that held that the Right to Life envelops more than “life and appendage” including necessities of life, sustenance, haven, and education.

Charging immense expenses limits admittance to instruction to the lower layers of society and makes it accessible just to the more extravagant segment of individuals. Poor meriting up-and-comers can not get confirmation because of the failure to pay the endorsed charges and as a result, in instructive establishments, a resident’s “All in all correct to Education” gets denied. Further, permitting the charging of an exceptionally high capitation expense disregards Article 14 of the Constitution of India the Court noted. The main strategy for admission to clinical universities ought to be founded on merit alone. The court likewise said that the judgment cannot is applied reflectively and cases past this cant receive the reward of the judgment.

CONCLUSION

The Hon’ble Court displayed its choice of standards of social government assistance and value. 10 years and a half before ‘Right to Education’ was officially presented in the Constitution. The judgment is moderate and somewhat radical. The Court was constant in its understanding of what summed as a capitation expense and its relevance — or deficiency in that department. Its exhaustive assessment of Fundamental Rights interlinked with the Right to training was exemplary. The Court underscored the Right to rise to the opportunity being similarly essentially as vital as the Right to uniformity itself. An extreme assertion in the recently changed Indian setting, the idea that the Right to training moved from the Right to life honored the philosophies of the days of yore. The Court put import on merit as opposed to monetary capital, a demonstration that should have been visible as an obstruction against privatizing instruction.

This article is written by Arpita Kaushal, a student of UILS, PUSSGRC, HOSHIARPUR.

INTRODUCTION

The age-old Contempt of Courts laws’ history comes way back from the period of Regulating Act enacted by the British in India, where, the Mayor’s Court was given the authority which is equal to that of the English King’s Bench court for assigning punishment for the offence of contempt of court.

The first Contempt of Courts Act was enacted in 1926. The Act gave the authority to the three High Courts in Colonial India- Bombay, Madras and Calcutta to penalise any person for the offence of contempt on itself and also its inferior courts. The punishment was imprisonment for a minimum of 6 months or a fine or both for committing the Act. However, on an apology submitted by the accused, he/ she would be discharged.

After India acquired independence, the Act of 1926 was replaced by the Contempt of Courts Act 1952. The highest court of India, i.e., the Supreme Court also known as the Court of Record has been given powers that the High Courts during British India had along with the power to penalise for contempt by Article 129 of the Constitution of India. The Act of 1954 had many shortcomings in it. The committee headed by the Former Additional Solicitor General, H. N. Sanyal, reviewed the contempt laws in 1971 after a decade of its enforcement. The Committee was mandated to: 

(i) review the law pertaining to court contempt generally, and in particular, the law pertaining to the sanctioning process;

(ii) to propose changes therein in order to (whenever necessary) clarify and revise the law; and

(iii)  to offer suggestions for the codification of the legislation.

The lacunae present in the previous Acts have been corrected and the present Contempt Courts Act 1971 was formulated as per which, it is “An Act to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto.”

CONTEMPT OF COURTS

In general terms, we can understand that anyone who disrespects the court or its legal authorities or disobeys the order of the court, the judge has the right to impose fines on them or can sentence imprisonment for some time if found guilty of the act. This phrase can also be taken in terms of the judiciary’s freedom from restrictions. As is common knowledge, every judge has the authority to grant judicial proceedings within the bounds of the law. Anything that restricts or prevents a judge from granting a necessary judicial action can be considered contempt of court.

According to Section 2 (a) of The Contempt of Courts Act 1971, Contempt of Court is defined as civil or criminal contempt.¹

The Constitution of India has 2 two Articles regarding the Contempt of Courts.

1. Article 129²– This Article gives the power to Supreme Court to be the ‘Court of Record’ and it has the authority to penalise for contempt of itself and its inferior courts.
2. Article 142(2)³– The Supreme Court shall have absolute authority to issue an order for the purpose of securing any person’s attendance, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself, subject to the requirements of any law established in this regard by Parliament.
3. Article 215⁴– The High Courts have the right to punish for the contempt of courts and its lower courts.

CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971

The Contempt of Courts Act 1971, is the only act which has defined the terms ‘Contempt of Courts’ in the enactment. As mentioned earlier, contempt of court is defined as civil or criminal contempt. In Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty⁵, a person provided a court with an undertaking during civil proceedings. The court sanctioned a course of action based on the assumption that the undertaking was accurate, yet the undertaking appears to be false. As a result, this was viewed as misbehaviour and court contempt. There are various clauses in this legislation which state that doing so does not constitute contempt of court.

The Act specifies under Sections 3 to 7 that innocent publication and distribution of matter, accurate report of the proceedings, fair criticism, complaint against presiding officers of subordinate courts, and publication of information relating to proceedings in chambers or camera do not amount to contempt. Any other defences except mentioned under the act don’t affect. The Act gives the power to the high courts to try the contempt of courts cases and also the punishments are prescribed, procedures, etc., are mentioned.

Types of Contempt:

1. Civil Contempt:

Civil contempt is defined in Section 2 (b) as “wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other processes of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court;”⁶

Essentials of Civil Contempt:

• The disobedience or breach must be done wilfully.
• The act must be done deliberately.
• A genuine court order being issued, the respondent being aware of the order, and their capacity to comply.
• It does not include careless, negligent, honest, or unintended behaviour or a real incapacity to follow the requirements of the order.

Cases:

In Anil Ratan Sarkar v. Hirak Ghosh⁷, the Supreme Court has held that mere disobedience of the decree is not enough to prove civil contempt. The element of willingness is important to charge within the Act. In the case of Dr. Sajad Majid v. Dr. Zahoor Ahmed⁸, the court stated that mere pendency of the appeal in the appellate jurisdiction does not protect him from contempt of court if there is a non-compliance of the order and that would cause him risk since it’s done without any legal justification.

• Criminal Contempt:

According to section 2(c), “ ‘criminal contempt’ means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which— (i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or (ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or (iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.”⁹

Cases:

In the case of Jaswanth Singh v. Virender Singh¹⁰, a lawyer made a scandalous and insulting attack on the High Court judge. A petition for an election was submitted to the High Court by an advocate. In order to hear more arguments in an election petition and to transfer election petitions, he wished to ask to remain. These things undermine the High Court’s judicial process and have a propensity to embarrass the Court. In this instance, it was determined that there had been an attempt to intimidate the High Court judge and obstruct the conduct of a fair trial.

In Anantha Lal Singh v. Alfred Henry¹¹, it was held that any comment upon the advocate who is handling the suit amounts to contempt of court on the same principle, which is applicable to the judges or the judgement.

Punishments under The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971:

Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, mentions the punishments for the offence of contempt. The Act states that there can be simple imprisonment which extends to 6 months or with a fine, which extends to Rs. 2,000 or both. However, on the accused apologising for the act committed, he can be discharged or the punishment can be remitted. The Supreme Court has the authority to award punishment to its subordinate courts as well.

In the case of Re: Arundhati Roy¹², Supreme Court made the observation that legitimate criticism of a judge’s behaviour or the role of the judiciary as an institution may not constitute contempt if it is offered in good faith and for the benefit of the general public. The editors of the Times of India and the Indian Express were charged with contempt in 1978 as a result of the publication of articles that criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling in the habeas corpus case, ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla¹³, where the Supreme Court declined to defend the right to habeas corpus during the Emergency.

LACUNAE

The list continues, but on two fronts, the Act receives harsh criticism. The term “scandalizing the court,” which is used in Section 2(c)(i), is unable to identify action that scandalizes or incites biases against the judicial establishments, leaving a grey area. The meaning of contempt has not been adequately and precisely provided.

In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India¹⁴, it was held –

• that scandalizing the court is not only an offence under the Act but is sui generis. While courts are not unduly sensitive to fair or even outspoken comments, in the larger interest of protecting the administration of Justice, no one can be permitted to distort orders of the court and deliberately give a slant to its proceedings and bring it to ridicule.
• Courts succumbing to the pressure tactics of litigants would result in negation of rule of law. Threats of public protests, meetings and undertaking satyagrahis against orders of Supreme Court prima facie appear to be an attempt to prejudice or interfere with the due course of judicial proceedings.
• Courts cannot be forced by pressure tactics of litigants to change their decisions, by organizing protests against court orders in pending judicial proceedings.
• Supreme Court’s shoulders are broad enough to shrug off comments and no action in contempt is needed to be initiated.

Criticism of the Court and restrictions on free speech – A PIL attorney named Prashant Bhushan was found guilty of contempt of court in 2020. He had criticized the judiciary for paying only partial attention to hearing cases during the lockdown after sharing a news photo of India’s then-Chief Justice, Sharad Bobde, riding a motorcycle without a face mask during the Covid-19 epidemic.

The Legal Fraternity has attacked it as having a chilling effect on this right as well since its definition is too broad and imprecise, allowing it to be used to shield the judges from criticism, and because the Freedom of Speech is constrained by the court’s power of contempt. The constitutionality of the Contempt of Courts Act was also challenged by Bhushan and others; this case is still pending.

The Supreme Court declared that merely criticizing the court does not amount to contempt of court in PN Dua v. Shiv Shankar & Ors¹⁵. The Court ruled that as long as criticisms of the legal system or of judges don’t interfere with or obstruct the administration of justice, they should be welcomed in the public realm. However, some people have thought that criticism is being linked with diminishing the authority of courts, which is completely untrue.

CONCLUSION

The Contempt of Courts Act 1971 can be said as a colonial act due to its presence in society. The act provides the provisions that protect the dignity of the courts and the judges. Contempt of court is a concept whose remedy is to prove that the information is true. There also are provisions in the act which provide exceptions for the contempt of courts. However, there is also the perspective that, the extent of the contempt authority is constrained by giving it a clear and specific meaning, making it impossible to employ it carelessly or indiscriminately.

It is undeniable that the judiciary has exceptional power when it comes to contempt. The aforementioned authority must be used to uphold the Rule of law, not the supremacy of any particular judge. The rule of law frequently manifests itself through court and tribunal judgements. Therefore, the Court’s inherent authority to protect the majesty and dignity of the courts is the Contempt Jurisdiction.

REFERENCES

1. The Contempt of Courts Act 1971, s. 2(a).
2. The Constitution of India, art. 129.
3. The Constitution of India, art. 142 (2).
4. The Constitution of India, art. 215.
5. Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty, 1990 AIR 464.
6. The Contempt of Courts Act 1971, s. 2(b).
7. Anil Ratan Sarkar v. Hirak Ghosh, AIR 2002 SC 1405.
8. Dr. Sajad Majid v. Dr. Zahoor Ahmed, 1989 Crl.L.J. 2065
9. The Contempt of Courts Act 1971, s. 2(c).
10. Jaswanth Singh v. Virender Singh, 1994 suppl. (5) SCR 336 
11. Anil Ratan Sarkar v. Hirak Ghosh, AIR 1931 Cal 257.
12. Re: Arundhati Roy…. … vs — on, 2002 AIR (SCW) 1210.
13. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, AIR 2010 SC 2221.
14. Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr. …. Alleged Contemnor(S)
15. P.N. Dua v Shiv Shankar & Ors, 1988 AIR 208.

This article is written by K. Mihira Chakravarthy, first year BA LLB student from Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University (DSNLU).

About the Firm

Based in the capital of India, RTA Law Chambers is a well-established law firm which provides legal services in Litigation, Advisory, Consultation, Arbitration, Agreement Drafting and retainer services. Having legal practice spanning across all courts in Delhi – NCR, They have been handling cases with a result-oriented approach, both professionally and ethically and further providing legal consultancy and advisory services. The firm is well equipped in dealing with clients through the expertise, intellect, experience and knowledge of the management.

The firm was set up with the mindset to serve the clients with better focus, to provide better legal advice which is viable for the clients along with proper legal representation.

Internship Description

RTA Law Chambers is looking to hire interns:

• Eligibility: (4th & 5th-year law students)
• Duration: One month (August 2022). 

How to Apply?

Interested applicants may send their updated CVs to advrtalchambers@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is accurate to our knowledge. However, it is advised that you verify and confirm things on your end.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Firm

AAA Legal is a law firm with an illustrative legacy of 14 years of practice and advisory. Areas of practice include Arbitration, Banking laws, Competition laws, Data protection, Employment and labour, Intellectual property including Innovation & Technology, Real estate, Customs laws and investigations, White-Collar Crime & Criminal laws Sectors: Automotive, Data Privacy advisory, E-commerce, Renewable Energy, Entertainment and Media, Infrastructure & Construction, Real Estate, Telecom & Technology.

Internship Description

• Mode: Virtual/Online
• Duration: 1 month (August)
• Eligibility: Law students

How to Apply?

Interested candidates can email their CV to litigation@aaalegal.pro (The subject of the email should read ‘Virtual/Online internship for August 2022’).

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is accurate to our knowledge. However, it is advised that you verify and confirm things on your end.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Firm

AP & Partners was founded with a simple and compelling vision: A team of highly experienced lawyers focused on the most significant opportunities and challenges facing their clients. They are chosen by clients because of their experience, depth of knowledge and ability to manage difficult situations. They aim to deliver exceptional value to their clients by providing clear and actionable advice. They are defined by their approach.

AP & Partners like to work on matters that require the personal attention of their partners. To that end, their associates-to-partner ratio is low. Every mandate that they accept involves at least two of their partners so that their clients benefit from debate and discussion within the team. Their associates have significant past work experience. As to costs, they are innovative with their billing arrangements and look to create value for clients. Their lock-step compensation system allows their lawyers to focus on providing their clients with the best possible service and advice, without regard to extrinsic factors. Their distinctive structure allows them to draw on the strengths of the entire firm for any given matter and offer a wider perspective than that afforded by the specialized practices that make up a typical large law firm. Their lawyers are passionate about the work they do and are highly driven.

Job Description

AP & Partners is looking for lawyers with 3-5 years of post-qualification experience for their corporate and M&A practice.

As a corporate lawyer with the firm, you will act on a wide range of transactions including inbound and outbound M&A transactions. The work profile would also include advising tech businesses and their promoters on fundraising and exit transactions, and regulatory advisory. This is a great opportunity for enthusiastic, ambitious and hardworking lawyers who are ready to take their careers to the next level.

Ideal candidates will have:

• a law degree from a leading Indian law school. An LLM from an international law school would be a plus;
• 3-5 years of post-qualification experience;
• experience in handling small/mid-size transactions and due diligence with limited supervision; and
• prior work experience with the corporate practice of a leading firm.

How to Apply?

Eligible candidates can send their resumes to careers@appartners.in.

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is accurate to our knowledge. However, it is advised that you verify and confirm things on your end.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Firm

Mind Legal, a full-service law firm is a perfect amalgamation of years of practical experience and deep-rooted theoretical and conceptual understanding. Based out of Delhi, the Firm has been founded by a group of highly trained, disciplined and enthusiastic young visionaries who combine their immense enthusiasm and global exposure to deliver expedient solutions to every single client. With invaluable insights into a very broad spectrum of industries, the firm is driven by the single-minded proposition of providing quality legal services and solutions to clients seeking legal assistance in areas like general corporate, project finance, mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, taxations, banking, technology law, litigation and dispute resolution, regulatory and policy framework.

The Firm’s unwavering professionalism partnered with the ability to adapt and adopt is what allows it to consistently deliver excellence without failing. Having handled diverse litigations successfully in various courts, tribunals and forums, Mind Legal has in a short span of time become synonymous with trust and has established itself as a firm that delivers legally enforceable and commercially viable solutions.

About the Internship

1. Mode: Offline/in-office
2. Students who are in their 3rd, 4th and 5th year (5-year course), 2nd and 3rd year (3-year course) are eligible to apply.
3. Well-versed with civil law, criminal law, corporate law and other Indian laws.
4. Fluent in English and good research skills. 
5. Students based in Delhi-NCR will be given preference.

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may send their updated CVs to: info@mindlegal.in and shreya@mindlegal.in.

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is accurate to our knowledge. However, it is advised that you verify and confirm things on your end.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Firm

Sapphire & Sage Law Offices is a boutique Indian law firm based in Delhi. The firm’s aim is to provide clear, concise and practical advice based on an in-depth knowledge of our domain expertise in niche sectors and general legal practices.

The Practice area spans the entire spectrum in an array of business sectors viz, Infrastructure and Energy, Real estate, Insolvency and Bankruptcy, Banking and Finance, Corporate and commercial, Media and Broadcasting, Telecommunication, Defence and Aviation to name a few. The law firm has been established with a vision to provide a platform for entities across the globe to find the best legal solution from the stage of incorporation to regular business practices by our domain experts who have super specialisation in their area of expertise, all under one roof.

About the Internship

Team S&S invites applications for a physical 2-month Internship Program with Sapphire and Sage Law Offices (Delhi Office) in the Litigation Department dealing in Civil and Criminal matters and General Corporate Department.

1. Responsibilities

• Research and Development
• Drafting
• Law Review
• Legal, Contractual, and Regulatory matters
• Paralegal Assistance

2. Perks: The Intern would be eligible for a stipend/engagement opportunity, if any, based on work performance only. Certificates will be awarded on completion of the internship.

3. Eligibility: Immediate joining of 4th or 5th-year law students.

How to Apply?

 Interested candidates can send their updated CVs to contact@sapphireandsage.in.

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is accurate to our knowledge. However, it is advised that you verify and confirm things on your end.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Company

As of May 2022, IndiGo had a market share of 57.9 percent, making it the largest passenger airline in India. As a low-cost carrier, it focuses on its three pillars of low rates, punctuality, and providing a pleasant and hassle-free service when serving the domestic air travel market in India. Being on time has come to be associated with IndiGo.

About the Responsibilities  

A Legal Counsel is being sought by the business.

As a legal Counsel you are required to: –

• To manage different sorts of contracts, like services agreements, on an end-to-end basis. Software development agreements, software licencing agreements, sales and marketing agreements, lease agreements, purchase agreements, agreements relating to the maintenance of aircraft and parts, as well as discussions with internal clients, drafting, developing a consensus and incorporating the comments of various internal clients (departments), negotiations with counterparty, execution, closing, and assistance in the implementation of agreements are all covered.
• To provide internal clients with guidance on a variety of non-tax legislation, such as contract law, aviation law, and business law. FEMA and to make sure that any contracts or other agreements IndiGo proposes to sign into are in compliance with the law.
• occasionally consult with outside attorneys to get their thoughts and/or advise on transactions, the ability to complete work with a high degree of independence and with little oversight over time.
• Support the development, improvisation, and execution of internal procedures to guarantee effective and timely assignment closures and to reduce legal risks for IndiGo. Possess a mindset of continual growth.
• Additionally, it is crucial that the resource perform independently, collaborate closely with multiple departments, and take the initiative.
• Strong interpersonal and organisational abilities, as well as the capacity to function well in a fast-paced professional environment.
• Show your capacity to reason swiftly, come to decisions, and express legal challenges and solutions succinctly.
• outstanding oral and written communication abilities, as well as a clear and concise authoring style.

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: – careers.goindigo.in or goindigo.app.param.ai

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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

About the Organization

On September 30, 1994, the National Minorities Development and Finance Corporation (NMDFC) was established as a not-for-profit organisation in accordance with Section 25 of the Companies Act of 1956, which is now Section 8 of the Companies Act of 2013. The primary goal of NMDFC is to give low-interest loans to underserved groups of the disadvantaged minorities so they can engage in self-employment and other sources of income.

About the Responsibilities  

To encourage students to pursue graduate or postgraduate degrees in the legal field at reputable Indian universities and institutions, NMDFC is creating an internship programme. The NMDFC launches an internship programme. This programme aims to enrol students in graduate and postgraduate programmes at reputable Indian universities and institutions in a variety of areas. The interns will be exposed to several NMDFC departments, and they are expected to contribute to the business. Gaining insight into how the business operates will be beneficial to the interns and may help them achieve their professional goals.

Time Period

The internship will be accessible all year long depending on NMDFC needs, with a three-month initial commitment that may be continued for an additional three months.

Eligibility

• UG/PG in Law
• Genuine students from any accredited university or institution in India who meet the requirements below may apply for an internship in the field of legal and recovery.
• Students who earned at least 70% or an equal grade in their most recent test and at least 85% in Class III are considered to have passed.
• Students who have taken the final test, have recently finished graduation, post-graduation, or an equivalent degree and are awaiting results may also be given consideration for an internship, provided that: The desired applicants must have obtained not less than 85 percent in Class XII and 70 percent or more overall in all of their graduation/post-graduation years/semesters, or the equivalent, as of the application deadline.The applicant may apply for an internship starting in the month of July and continuing through the month of December of the same year, as long as the time between the month of the final exam’s result announcement and the desired internship month does not exceed six months.

Perks

• A certificate would be provided on the successful completion of the internship.

How to Apply?

Interested candidates may apply from here: – by sending their resumes along with the “No Objection Certificate (NOC)” issued by the Head of Institution in the format as per Annexure­B at nmdfc.hrm.admn@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: All information posted by us on Lexpeeps is true to our knowledge. But still, it is suggested that you check and confirm things on your level.

For regular updates, we can catchup at-

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/G4bxdgRGHY8GRzOPSHrVwL

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

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