ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Supreme CourtSubscribe to Supreme Court

Interpreting Narmada Judgment

In judging the Narmada Bachao Andolan case, the Supreme Court, using the 'separation of powers' doctrine, side-stepped the issues of entitlement and suffering, and chose to concern itself only with the issues of relief and rehabilitation. It was only on the latter issue that the court was willing to hear the representation of the NBA. The weak interrogation of the doctrine of separation of powers allowed the court to abdicate much of its responsibility to those affected by the Narmada dam project.

Delhi

Although the central government has passed relevant legislation and the Supreme Court has issued directives for the safe disposal of hospital wastes, few of the capital's hospitals ensure that the massive amount of potentially hazardous waste they produce is consigned safely.

Justice, the State and Sathins' Struggle

The recent Supreme Court verdict ordering the Women's Development Programme in Rajasthan to re-employ the 'sathins' dismissed unjustly 10 years ago poses almost as many issues as it resolves. By not asking for the reinstatement of the sathins, not only do they lose retrospective payment, but more importantly, the apex court appears to be reserving judgment on the relevance of the programme. This has to be seen in the context of recent developments in the state which are directly and indirectly undermining what has been a remarkably dynamic and sustained effort to link women's development with social development soliciting the agency of the state.

Mutuality of Interest in Excise Valuation

From an analysis of the legal pronouncements on the subject it is clear that in the absence of mutuality of interest between two firms there cannot be any legitimate conclusion that they are related persons, even if they are principal and subsidiary.

Pages

Back to Top