Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

“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