Tag: #MaharashtraGovernment

-Report by Nandini Gupta

In the case of The State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Ms. Madhuri Maruti Vidhate, Hon’ble Justice M.R. Shah ordered that appointment on the mere grounds of compassionate after several years is unsustainable.

FACTS

The father of the respondent died in harness while working in clerical cadre with the appellants. Following this incident, the mother of the respondent i.e., the wife of the deceased was given an appointment on the grounds of compassion. But she also died in service. On 18th August 2011, the elder daughter (elder sister of the respondent) submitted an application for an appointment on the grounds of compassion which got rejected as she was married and not dependent on the deceased parents. Later, after two years on 26th February 2013, government issued another notice instructing to provide employment to one of the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased government servant on the grounds of compassion.

In the following next month, another daughter (respondent) of the deceased mother who is also married submitted an application asking to provide employment on the grounds of compassion. This application was also rejected dated 23rd April 2013. The respondent filed an application in Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal and High Court of Judicature at Bombay where the judgement was in favor of the respondents ordering to consider the appointment on compassionate grounds.

The court while delivering the judgement considered the precedents where it was ordered that the appointment on compassionate grounds for all the vacancies or posts of the government equal opportunity should be provided to all the aspirants as per Article 14 (Equality before Law) and Article 16 (Equality of Opportunity in Matters of Employment under the State) of Constitution of India.

Moreover, the appointment on compassionate grounds is merely a concession instead of a right granted for the sake of economic stability to the family member or one of the dependent of the deceased. Reference was made to the case of Mumtaz Yunus Mulani v. State of Maharashtra [(2008) 11 SCC 384] where the court has adopted the principle that appointment on compassionate grounds is not a source or gateway for recruitment, instead it is a way to walk over the sudden financial crisis suffered by the deceased of the family.

COURT’S DECISION

The Supreme Court considering all the facts of the case and precedents, quashed the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal and High Court and dismissed the writ petition. The court observed that the High Court of Judicature at Bombay and Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal have given an erroneous decision by directing the appellants to appoint the respondents on the grounds of compassion when appointment after several years of death of the mother is unjustifiable.

-Report by Ojas Bhatnagar

The Bombay High Court has directed the Secretary of the Home Department, Maharashtra Government to compensate a Nigerian National for detaining him due to an error in the report. This has been held in the case of Novafor Samuel Inoamaobi vs The State of Maharashtra A Nigerian national was wrongly arrested under the NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) Act in 2020.

FACTS

The Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) received a tip that a Nigerian National would be coming to a particular spot at a specific time to sell cocaine. To prevent this, a raid was conducted by the same. The ATS arrested a person who looked suspicious and found cocaine in a blue plastic bag, some pink ecstasy tablets and heart-shaped pills. The seized material was sent to the Directorate of Forensic Science Laboratory and they prepared an examination report where they identified the goods as caffeine and on the basis of which the Nigerian National was charged under sections 8C, 20, 22 of the NDPS Act.

However, after almost 2 years the assistant director of Forensic Science Laboratory, Home Department, admitted his mistake stating that these substances are not under the jurisdiction of the NDPS Act. The sufferer has thus asked for bail.

Court’s Decision

The Bombay High Court has very clearly stated that the applicant deserves bail without a question. The substance found was not contraband and the raid which the ATI conducted does not fall under the purview of the NDPS Act. The typing error is a blatant mistake. An individual’s liberty is a fundamental right, enshrined in Article 21 and applies to foreigners too. The Court has observed:

“Liberty of an individual is of paramount importance and it is the fulcrum of the Indian democracy. Recognized as a
fundamental right, enshrined in Article 21, it is available to every person, citizens and foreigners alike. The incarceration of the applicant, with the above clarification, has therefore, become unlawful, as, but for this report, no offence could have been made out against him.”

The court has asked the State Government to come up with a proposal as to how to compensate the applicant for his incarceration.

-Report by Apurva Jain

The Bombay High Court on Monday requested the Maharashtra Government to quickly investigate the constitution from administrative experts for surrogacy techniques under the new Assisted Reproductive Technology Act (ART) and Surrogacy Act.

A division bench of Justices SV Gangapurwala and Shriram Modak was hearing a couple’s prayer looking to finish their surrogacy methodology started before the new Acts. The couple looked to move of their cryo-safeguarded incipient organisms out of PD Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Center to some other fruitfulness facility.

During the meeting, the court advised the state to investigate the issue of comprising specialists commanded under the law. In the wake of losing both their kids, the candidates, the two legal counselors, settled on surrogacy and were taking treatment from Dr. Arati Adhe at Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai. Midway through the candidate’s treatment, in January 2022, the new Assisted Reproductive Technology Act (ART) 2021 and Surrogacy Act 2021 was advised.

The candidates have guaranteed that not long after the two demonstrations were authorized, the medical clinic would not go on with the surrogacy method and furthermore wouldn’t move the cryo-saved undeveloped organisms to some other fruitfulness center.

Since the clinic was reluctant to move the incipient organism and furthermore attributable to the non-constitution of different specialists, especially National board and State sheets under the Art Act, the couple moved toward the Bombay High Court.

It very well might be noticed that the Act commands the constitution of these specialists in no less than 90 days of its
coming into force on January 25, 2022. The High Court gave notice and looked for the Hospital’s reaction.

On Monday the couple’s advice presented that the exchange of undeveloped organisms starting with one facility and then onto the next wouldn’t influence the interest of anybody and restricted help to that degree to be permitted. The promoter showing up for the emergency clinic eagerly went against the exchange of the undeveloped organisms. It contended that the exchange ought not to be allowed considering part 29 of the ART Act.

Since the case includes inquiries of regulation, the bench posted the writ appeal for a definite hearing on July 7, 2022 Nonetheless, when the candidate’s advice brought up that compulsory sheets under the Act were not framed, the court looked for express insight reaction.

The court said that it was not passing any composed request for constitution of the power, yet the state ought to investigate this issue before the following date of hearing. States like Telangana and Punjab have already constituted the boards and appropriate authorities under the Act. The central government also constituted the national board on 4th May 2022.

However, the State Board is yet to be constituted in Maharashtra.

The High Court held that urgent measures should be taken to control the deaths of children due to malnutrition or lack of medical facilities in Melghat, Amravati District tribal areas. Considering the case of Dr. Rajendra Sadanand Burma vs State of Maharashtra and numerous PILs, the Division Bench held that all the necessary public health facilities associated with nutrition, pregnancy, and specialists should be provided in the region immediately.

Social Activist, Bandu Sampatrao Sane also played a major role in providing justice to the needy people seeking help. Since last 4 months, more than seventy percent of children below 6 years died and 20 were stillborns in the Melghat region

Chief Justice firmly asks why the help is not provided in the region as there is not even a single gynecologist and pediatrician. The High Court directed the state to monitor the situation quickly, else the State Public Health Department and The Public Health Department Secretary have to rise to the occasion and will be held guilty. Justice Dipankar Datta also warned the Health Secretary that no more deaths should be there by 6 September due to malnutrition. The court adjourned the matter to September 6 and asked for immediate relief and regular health checkups for pregnant women in the Chikhaldara region.

-Report by SANDHYA PRAJAPATI