Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

“Delhi High Court Vacates Interim Order, Citing ‘Prudence’ in Legal Challenge over DARC Fellowship Disengagement”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment delivered on October 3, 2023, the Delhi High Court, presided by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, made a significant decision regarding the disengagement of Fellows and Associate Fellows under the Delhi Assembly Research Centre (DARC) Fellowship Programme. The court vacated an interim order that had previously restrained the discontinuation of services and directed the payment of stipends to the affected parties.

The judgment, which examined the legal Intricacies surrounding the disengagement, referenced the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023. This ordinance played a pivotal role in the proceedings, as it altered the distribution of powers and authority within the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

In its observations, the court emphasized the need for caution when granting interim orders, particularly those that effectively stay actions such as disengagements. The court referred to the prudence required in such situations.

According to the judgment, “Propriety demands that this Court ought not to have passed any interim order which had the effect of staying the Order dated 05.07.2023 and other consequential orders.”

This ruling signifies a critical development in the ongoing legal battle over the engagement of Fellows and Associate Fellows in the DARC and the subsequent disengagement. It underscores the complex legal landscape surrounding the authority and decision-making processes in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

The legal challenge had also referred to various legal provisions, including Article 123 of the Constitution of India, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991, and government notifications related to reservations and services. The judgment highlights the intricate legal issues at the heart of the matter.

The decision ultimately provides clarity on the status of the interim order and directs parties involved to approach the Apex Court for further clarification. This judgment sets a precedent for future cases involving similar legal complexities within the region.

Date of Decision: 03 OCTOBER 2023

 SUBHASHINI RATAN & ORS.  vs LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT NCT OF DELHI &

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/subhashini-ratan-v-legislative-assembly-30Sep23-Del.pdf"]

Latest Legal News