A division bench of the Gujarat High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwala, has observed last week, while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) that has challenged the Gujarat government policy to recruit young people on fixed salary for five years, that “It had “almost” made up its mind that the state government’s scheme to recruit Class III and IV employees on fixed salary for a fixed time frame was in violation of Constitutional provisions.” Dr. Rajendra Shukla, president of the Shree Yogkshem Foundation for Human Dignity, the petitioner of the aforesaid PIL called the policy of Government of Gujarat as ‘unlawful’ and ‘unfair’ labour practice, which is exploitative in nature and has recently further added in public that, “In our state of Gujarat, today ‘State Sponsored Financial Exploitation’ is practised, wherein the youth are employed on a fixed salary basis, like Vidhya Sahayak for teachers, Lok Rakshak for police and Gram Mitra in rural administration, which is a practice not followed anywhere else in the country. For instance, a youth will get employed for a meagre amount of Rs.1350 per month for five years. Imagine how his person would be running his house? Under the name of development, everything is hollow.”

It was a dispute that there is no law or legislation to curb corruption, now it is a dispute that there is no strong legislation proposed to curb any corruption…. and all our politicians with their volunteers are involved in one kind of internal war against each other, without attending to their parliamentary functions and there is a bog waste of our valuable time, public money and man hours in such liquid political situations… This is really unfortunate transactions of the present time, because several laws are there in our nation… yet another agitation is procured without any judicious consideration… as you know well that the so-called Lokpal bill is still not legislated, but the so-called corrupt ministers like Raja, and Kanimozi could have been sent behind the bars… even in past several immune personalities should have suffered and incurred even severe imprisonments or vigorous sentences for their dishonest actions… and more such so-called immune public servants may be sent to jails in coming days, for their illegal dishonest corruptions… The History of our Nation is a good witness of such events, one can look at it… and It is that only important ingredient of “Dishonesty” behind every serious public offence like corruption, misappropriation, theft, cheating, criminal breach of trust or unlawful gratification pertaining to the moral turpitude under Indian Penal Code and other present Acts, … So provisions of laws are there and remedies are also enacted, simply proper implementation and appropriate maintenance is strictly essential to control such the evil or corruption… and above all the strong and honest will power and determination to curb the corruption is necessary before any action or legislation… because “Laws alone are not the remedies to control corruption”. If one may look at our certain landmark judicial precedents, it may be certainly summarized that “Nobody is immune in the eyes of laws, if he has contravened any express provisions of laws….No action is protected, if it is done against the provisions of laws…. an illegal act can not be said as an official act or duty…. no public servants are entitled to act beyond the laws… Thus every dishonest action or inaction are liable to be punished if it is so intended.. But it is never strongly intended, except we spend again and again… as usually in the hands of politically oriented people… As a matter of fact, the recent remarks of our Hon Supreme Court ” How much we are spending on the security of the people who don’t deserve it.. “ says lots of things… if we read and see in between the lines in the large interest of our country…

Recently on failure to deposit the penalty costs of Rs.25000/- for filing a frivolous litigation, as ordered in the judgment of WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 129 of 2011, on Dt.14 October 2011 , the Division Bench of the HON. CHIEF JUSTICE MR.BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA and HON. MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA of Gujarat High Court has further passed an order to issue a bailable warrant against the litigant petitioner lawyer Mr. Asok Pande, if he fails to comply with the order further within a week from 8th December 2011. As it is previously discussed, the Petitioner Lawyer Mr. Pande had sought removal of Gujarat governor after chief minister Narendra Modi wrote a letter to the prime minister to recall her from her office, for appointing justice Mr. R A Mehta as Lokayukta without his consent. The Petitioner Lawyer had contended with the so-called supremacy of the Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi that the governor’s appointment itself was illegal because Modi’s consent was not taken before her appointment.And after hearing all the parties to this writ petition finally On October 14 this year, a division bench of Gujarat High Court has slapped him in a precedent setting manner, with a penalty costs of Rs.25000/- while dismissing his “publicity interest litigation” or “political interest litigation”.

Recently while dealing with the issue about the implementation and fixation of the previously proposed Scheme of High Security Registration Plates (HSRP) in all States and Union Territories of India, the Bench of Hon. Chief Justice of India, Mr. Justice S.K. Kapadia, Mr. Justice A.K. Patnaik and Mr. Justice Swatanter Kumar of the Supreme Court of India, again strongly emphasized for the the Implementation of the said HSRP Scheme and continued with its deadline to 30th April 2012, without changing its date for implementation all over the country. While adjudicating above issue, The Hon. Apex Court has further observed therewith, restricting all other High Courts of India too in the large interest of justice that “ With a view to ensuring proper implementation of the judgments and directions of this Court, as contained in its various orders, in regard to manufacturing and affixation of the HSRP, it is imperative for this Court to direct that it will be in the fitness of things and even the judicial proprietary would demand that no High Court should pass any interim orders cancelling or staying the tender process in relation to implementation of the scheme.” And further taking serious notes of the individual actions of all the states and union territories of our country, the Hon. Supreme Court of India strictly has commented that “ Despite the above orders of this Court, majority of the States have not fully implemented the scheme regulating issuance and fixation of High Security Registration Plates (HSRP). From the affidavits filed on behalf of the respective States, it is clear that they have not been vigilant enough to take appropriate steps for initiation and completion of the HSRP scheme and, in any case, not with required expeditiousness.” In respect of Gujarat, it is observed by the Apex Court that ” The State of Gujarat had issued the tender notice and considered even the persons not possessed of `TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE’. However, they have added a condition that upon awarding of the contract and before manufacturing HSRP, the TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE duly signed by the competent authority should be submitted, at most within three months. Due date for submission of tender was 20th October, 2011. Five bids had been received. Technical bids had been opened. Financial bids are to be opened on 28th November, 2011 and the agreement would be signed by 15th April, 2012. We do not contribute to the method that has been adopted by the State of Gujarat for implementation of the scheme. They ought to have acted in consonance with the directions of this Court. Be that as it may, since the conditions contained in the directions of this Court have not been waived and only a period has been prescribed to submit the `TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE’, we do not consider it appropriate to direct the State to hold the entire tender process afresh. But we make it clear that the agreement should be signed and the implementation of scheme should positively commence by 30th April, 2012. We also make it clear that no further time would be granted to the State of Gujarat in this behalf.“

Recently the social Networks like Facebook, Yahoo etc are hugely misused to upload offensive, defamatory and even abusive contents in respect of political personalities, celebrities, big industrialists, and even for young guys of any sex, simply in the names of fun, fury or political propaganda… Circulation of any such defamatory offensive or abusive contents among the circles or groups of friends can be a matter of fun and amusement but it is still an offence of defamation, in accordance with the provisions of Section:500 of India Penal Code and all those persons who are publishing, circulating, promoting and commenting and even sustaining on their Networks can be liable for the punishment as well as for a huge compensation in respect of any such offence of defamation and libel in the eyes of Indian Laws… Yet lots of such offensive publication and circulation of defamatory contents of our Political Leaders and celebrities are procured and promoted everyday on such Social Networking Sites, without any restraint.. and thus Freedom of Speech has crossed beyond the line and limits of demarcation, which is a true bitter fact.. Therefore India needs Cyber Policemen, who can ensure freedom of Speech and filter Abuses… Hence yesterday an eminent lawyer of Supreme Court of India and the Cabinet Minister in the Centre Mr. Kapil Sibal indicated in reference to such the cyber storm and misuse of Internet medias recently that ” Our Indian government is working on some specific guidelines to enforce some sort of monitoring to screen the contents of the social networks. Intention of the government is just to monitor objectionable content and not to interfere with the freedom of expression or Freedom of The Press. We will evolve guidelines to ensure such content is not part of any platform. We simply want some human intervention until these platforms develop technologies to stop objectionable content from getting published. Countries like China, Saudi Arabia and Iran censor the internet. China has 30,000 cyber-policemen who monitor the net..” A Google spokesperson has rightly said in this regards that “We follow the law when it comes to illegal content… But it also means that when content is legal but controversial we don’t remove it because people’s differing views should be respected, so long as they are legal.” Anyway, in the nick of this time, India needs Cyber Policemen, who can ensure freedom of Speech and filter Abuses of Media and Social networking..”

While adjudicating an issue about the route of the Tazia procession on the eve of Moharram, in the matters of SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 3143 of 2011 under Arts. 14, 19, 21, 25, 26 and 226 of the Constitution of India, HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA of Gujarat High Court has recently observed That” The right under Art. 25 on the religious freedom cannot be a matter of quarrel as in a democratic and secular country. Such freedoms would always be there, but it has to be subject to reasonable restrictions. What could be reasonable restriction cannot be defined in formula uniformly for every place, every occasion and every situation as it will have to be considered depending on various factors including the change in the topography of the city, volume of traffic, public interest and ultimately it is the public interest which must prevail. Therefore, pubic interest and maintenance of law and order is an aspect which cannot be overlooked and therefore it cannot be said that the petitioner can have any right to insist for a particular route “

Following the established judicial guidelines by the Apex Court, the Division Bench of MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI and MR.JUSTICE A.J. DESAI of Gujarat High Court allowed a writ with a significant observations in tune with the Rules of the Natural Justice, in respect of the impugned Blacklisting of the petitioner offset printing press, by the government agency, in a recently adjudicated proceedings of SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13929 of 2011, that “ the order (of Blacklisting) cannot be passed without issuing any notice or without affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected party.The law contemplates that prior to passing of the impugned order of blacklisting, opportunity of hearing has to be afforded to the affected party as the blacklisting entails civil consequences.