A Delhi-based Whats App group consisting of Keralites led by a former judge and a former Union Minister played a key role in <keyword id="2360204" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="airlifting">airlifting</keyword> a Kerala IT professional from a UK <keyword id="6358650" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="hospital">hospital</keyword> to one in Kozhikode in an air ambulance that arrived on Friday. The <keyword id="790242" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="WhatsApp">WhatsApp</keyword> group is known as Distress Management Collective and was formed 50 days back. It is led by retired former apex court judge <keyword id="108280" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kurian-Joseph">Kurian Joseph</keyword>. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="75341330" title="Coronavirus cases in India count crosses the 23,000 mark— with 718 dead and a 20.57% recovery rate" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> Speaking to IANS, K.J. Alphons, presently an Upper House member said that everything was accomplished in a matter of two days. "We got in touch with a mayor in the UK, Tom Aditya and then permission was sought from a few departments from Delhi. The Kerala government also agreed and everything was done in a flash. We were told they did not want any sort of publicity. According to original schedule, they were supposed to land tomorrow, but they arrived today at Kozhikode airport," said Alphons. The 36-year-old IT professional, working with UST Global in the UK, was suffering from a terminal illness and the family wanted to reach Kerala. Their efforts were successful with the involvement of many, including Alphons and it happened during the Covid lockdown times, not a mean achievement, by any chance, people have applauded. The patient, his wife and their young child landed in Kozhikode after couple of stops for refuelling. A sum of Rs 1 crore was collected through crowd funding with the company also chipping in for airlifting him. The patient is now admitted to a private hospital at Kozhikode. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="75344399" title="PM Modi launches eGramSwaraj portal and app to help villages go digital" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>

A WhatsApp group helps airlift ailing IT UK professional back to Kerala

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/43339502.cms" />NEW DELHI: The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Wednesday cancelled 214 <keyword id="6356966" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="100" keywordseo="Coal">coal</keyword> block allocations, giving the owners six months time to wind up their work. 
 A bench, headed by <keyword id="42759" type="POSITION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Chief-Justice">Chief Justice</keyword> RM Lodha, saved only four blocks — one belonging to <keyword id="45179" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="NTPC">NTPC</keyword> and SAIL each and two allocated to Sasan ultra mega power projects — from being cancelled.
 The bench, also comprising justices Madan B Lokur and <keyword id="108280" type="PERSON" weightage="80" keywordseo="Kurian-Joseph">Kurian Joseph</keyword>, granted six months breathing time to mining companies to wind up their operations in the coal blocks.
The saved four coal mines' allottes will pay government an additional levy of Rs 295 per tonne of coal extraction. 
 
The top court said it has given six months breathing time to functioning plants to arrange for coal from other sources. 
 
SC said government’s stand that it was prepared for cancellation of allocation as logical consequence of the court’s judgment declaring all allocations illegal and arbitrary helped it in arriving at a decision quickly on fate of coal blocks. 
 
READ ALSO: <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Coal-blocks-allocation-Centre-tells-Supreme-Court-something-went-wrong/articleshow/28590200.cms">Coal scam — Centre admits something went wrong</a> 
 
The bench also directed the companies, which were allocated coal blocks but had not operationalized them, to pay a compensation to the government for the loss of exchequer. It accepted the findings of the CAG which came to the conclusion that the loss of Rs 295 per tonne was caused due to the non-operation of the mines. 
 
The apex court had on August 25 held that all coal blocks allocation since 1993 by various regimes at the Centre have been made illegally and arbitrarily. 
 
During an earlier hearing in the case, the UPA govt had opposed cancellation of coal blocks allocation saying that around Rs 2 lakh crore had been invested by various companies after blocks were alloted to them. 
 
<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/43339455.cms" /> 
 
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">
	
		SC has given Govt 6 months to cancel the 214 coal allocations: Mukul Rohatgi, AG <a href="http://t.co/6Sdko2dhtl">pic.twitter.com/6Sdko2dhtl</a>
	— ANI (@ANI_news) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI_news/status/514700054729211905">September 24, 2014</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck">
	
		 
		We welcome SC's judgement,today our stand has been vindicated : Sambit Patra,BJP on SC's verdict on coal blocks <a href="http://t.co/9aqLNk8okr">pic.twitter.com/9aqLNk8okr</a>
	— ANI (@ANI_news) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI_news/status/514704955798605824">September 24, 2014</a></blockquote>
 
(With inputs from PTI)

Supreme Court Cancels All But Four Coal Blocks Allocated Since 1993

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/37766155.cms" />

	The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> asked Reliance ADAG's power distribution company, BSES Yamuna to pay up its dues to electricity generating utilities totaling Rs 257 crore by July 15. Currently, the company has 13.5 lakh customers in central and east Delhi.
 As per the records till June 30, the power distribution company owes Rs 60 crore to central generating and transmission utilities, including <keyword id="75753" type="COMPANY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Damodar-Valley-Corporation">Damodar Valley Corporation</keyword>, <keyword id="105181" type="COMPANY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Power-Grid-Corporation">Power Grid Corporation</keyword> and <keyword id="2402471" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="40" keywordseo="Aravali-Power-Company-Ltd-">Aravali Power Company Ltd.</keyword> <keyword id="75796" type="COMPANY" weightage="80" keywordseo="BSES-Yamuna">BSES Yamuna</keyword> also owes Rs 195 crore to Delhi-based power generating units Indraprastha, Delhi Transco and <keyword id="301258" type="COMPANY" weightage="40" keywordseo="Pragati-Power-Corporation">Pragati Power Corporation</keyword>. 

	BSES Yamuna also clarified that the government subsidy, which was promised but not factored in, was to the tune of Rs 96 crore and hence its total liability would be Rs 161 crore.
 Appearing for Delhi Transco and Indraprastha, <keyword id="132134" type="POSITION" weightage="40" keywordseo="Additional-Solicitor-General">additional solicitor general</keyword> <keyword id="243257" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Tushar-Mehta">Tushar Mehta</keyword> said the total dues as per their calculation was Rs 370 crore. However, <keyword id="45179" type="CITY" weightage="40" keywordseo="NTPC">NTPC</keyword>, which was the first to approach the court with a threat to disconnect power supply to the national capital because of mounting arrears from BSES Yamuna, informed the court that it had been fully paid by the discom. BSES’s <keyword id="2117" type="POSITION" weightage="40" keywordseo="senior-advocate">senior advocate</keyword> K V Vishwanathan attempted to put forth the discom's grievance. He said the state had not kept its promise of giving proper return on the Rs 15,000 crore investment made by the company. However, a bench headed by Chief Justice R M Lodha and Justice <keyword id="135052" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Madan-B-Lokur">Madan B Lokur</keyword> and Justice <keyword id="108280" type="PERSON" weightage="40" keywordseo="Kurian-Joseph">Kurian Joseph</keyword> said the apex court would decide about BSES Yamuna's grievances against the <keyword id="6354952" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="40" keywordseo="Delhi-Government">Delhi government</keyword> later. 

	“We are directing you only to pay current dues. Power generation and transmission companies are no baniya shops. You must clear all dues since January 2014 if you want electricity. You can’t continue like this. You are in arrears, arrears, arrears... This isn’t our headache,” observed the court.

	(Image: The Supreme Court of India's official webite)

SC Orders BSES Yamuna To Clear Rs 257 Crore Dues By July 15

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/52218522.cms" />The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> said the order by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (<keyword id="6356988" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="TRAI">TRAI</keyword>) asking telecom service providers to pay for <keyword id="6395111" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="call-drops">call drops</keyword> was unreasonable and struck it down. 
 
Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman said the TRAI notification was unreasonable, arbitrary and non-transparent. 
 During the hearing, the <keyword id="6379816" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Telecom-operators">telecom operators</keyword> said TRAI decision was a populist measure to accommodate consumers as call drops were happening for host of external considerations not attributable to them. 
 
The TRAI argued that the penalising for call drops was the least invasive way to deal with the issue and the telecos were making money from it. 
 
Meanwhile, the Apex Court has asked the Indian government to make a law on call drops similar to those in the US. 
 
The Cellular Operators' Association of India had approached the court challenging the Delhi High Court order which had upheld TRAI decision. 
 
(Image: Thinkstock)

Telecos will not compensate for call drops as Supreme Court strikes down TRAI order

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/53379727.cms" /> <keyword id="14678" type="PERSON" weightage="100" keywordseo="Vijay-Mallya">Vijay Mallya</keyword>, the absconding liquor baron of India, did not disclose his full assets, which include $45 million that he received from a British firm, said Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi. After hearing this, the honourable Supreme Court has issued a notice to the liquor baron, which needs to be responded within four weeks. 
 
In his statement, the Attorney General added that Mallya is accountable to the public money that he had taken on loan from several state-run banks. 
 
"This gentleman (Mallya) has not <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/ED-says-Vijay-Mallya-is-un-cooperative-seeks-revocation-of-his-diplomatic-passport/articleshow/51811500.cms">complied fully</a> with the orders of the court and he has not disclosed all the details about his assets. He has also not disclosed the amount of $45 million received by him from Diageo (British liquor major)," Rohatgi told a bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and R F Nariman. 
 
 
Also read: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/Vijay-Mallya-a-lesson-for-Indian-business-students/articleshow/51496588.cms">Vijay Mallya debt fiasco comes to some good use for Indian business schools</a> 
 
 
After this, the court issued a notice to <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/Mallya-to-address-Formula-1-British-Grand-Prix-PC/articleshow/53097834.cms">Mallya</a>, asking him to respond within four weeks on the plea filed by the consortium of banks led by SBI, which sought the initiation of contempt proceedings against him. 
 
Earlier, the court had said that it was important for Mallya to disclose the overseas assets owned by him and his <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/SC-says-Vijay-Mallya-will-have-to-declare-all-his-assets-to-the-Banks-including-that-of-his-wifes-and-childrens/articleshow/51994174.cms">family members</a>. 
 
<a href="http://www.campusghanta.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Vijay-Mallya-file-2013-SFI-pic-7mar2014.jpg">Image source</a>

SC issues notice to Vijay Mallya, asks to respond within four weeks

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/51328078.cms" />The <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=supreme+court">Supreme Court</a> did not agree with banks that <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=VIJAY+MALLYA">Vijay Mallya</a> should be personally present in the court. 
 
Instead, the apex court issued notices to Mallya, seeking his views on the petition filed for his presence in the court as banks said he had left the country. 
 
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, who sought such an order from the court, argued that Mallya’s Twitter messages showed that he may be in London and a court order would force him to come back to the country. 
 
READ ALSO: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/A-little-too-late-Mallya-flew-out-of-India-before-banks-could-take-a-stay-order-against-him/articleshow/51323634.cms">A little too late! Mallya flew out of India before banks could take a stay order against him</a> 
 
However, Justices Kurian Joseph and RF Nariman sought views from Mallya, United Breweries Holdings and the Indian Embassy in London, on the petition which wants him to disclose the details of all his assets to the court. 
 
Lenders are trying to recover loans worth a whopping Rs 9,000 crore from Mallya related to the now-defunct <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=kingfisher+airlines">Kingfisher Airlines</a> founded by him. 
 
Mallya will have to reply to the notice by March 30, the next date of hearing. The applications also demanded that he furnish adequate guarantees to secure his presence in court. 
 
(Image: Indiatimes)

SC issues notice to Vijay Mallya, his presence may not be required in the court

On 13 September, <keyword id="245445" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ranjan-Gogoi">Ranjan Gogoi</keyword>, was appointed the Chief of Justice of India (<keyword id="6363345" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="cji">CJI</keyword>), succeeding <keyword id="6355251" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="dipak-misra">Dipak Misra</keyword>. The moment was historic. Gogoi is the first CJI from the Northeast of India. He is also stepping into Misra’s shoes ahead of the latter’s retirement on 2 October. Given his status as the senior-most judge on the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> after Misra, his appointment was all but guaranteed. He was recommended for the post on 4 September by his predecessor. Gogoi has had a long and varied career since passing the bar in 1978. He spent the initial chunk of his career at the Guwahati High Court, before his transfer to the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2010 and eventual elevation to the Supreme Court in 2012. Here are five things you should know about the 46th CJI:- He will only have a tenure of 13 months As per the Indian Constitution, Chief Justices cannot be above the age of 65. Just like his predecessor Misra, Gogoi, who is currently 63 years of age, will only hold the post of CJI for 13 months. He will turn 65 on November 17th next year. Following his retirement, he will likely be replaced by the Madan Bhimarao Lokur, who is the senior-most judge after him. The short stints of Chief Justices has long been an issue of debate among Indian parliamentarians. Since independence, the 65-year limit has resulted in the average tenure of a CJI being around 18 months. Earlier this year, the government was said to be mulling a proposal to raise the retirement age of the CJI. However, this was mired in accusations that this was a ploy to prolong the tenure of Misra, who is said to favour the current administration. His father is a former chief minister of Assam Gogoi’s father, Keshab Chandra Gogoi, was a lawyer-turned politician and influential Congress leader in Assam. He became the chief minister of Assam for two months in 1982 as protests over the issue of illegal immigration swelled. Interestingly, according to the book Gauhati High Court: History and Heritage by Arup Kumar Dutta, when a colleague asked him if he wanted his son to become Chief Minister, KC Gogoi said that his son would one day become the CJI. He’s presided over a number of important SC judgements Gogoi has overseen a lot of important cases and judgements during his tenure as a Supreme Court judge. In May 2018, he revoked a proposal from the Uttar Pradesh government that allowed all ex-chief ministers to retain their official residences. He also presided over the cases of Arushi Talwar’s murder, the setting up of special courts to try Members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies and a judgement prohibiting the government from using photographs of anyone else but the PM, President and the CJI for advertising purposes. He is currently leading a bench that has been tasked with monitoring updates to the National Register of Citizens in order to prevent unnecessary deportations of Assamese residents. He has released details of his assets to the public Gogoi is among the 11 out of 23 sitting judges in the Supreme Court who have published details of their assets and financial holdings on the SC website. According to <a href="https://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/pdf/ASSETS/ranjangogoi.pdf">the filing</a>, he does not own a car and does not have any outstanding debts or investments in mutual funds or shares. Until this year, his most prominent assets were a piece of a land in Assam that he sold for ₹6.5 million in June 2018 and an old house he inherited from his mother in mid-2015. He was one of the judges who criticised former CJI Dipak Misra Gogoi’s possible appointment as CJI came under speculation after he and three other senior Supreme Court judges called a press conference at the beginning of 2018 to criticise CJI Misra and state the India’s democracy was under threat. In what was the first such event in the history of the Indian judicial system, the group of judges - which included Gogoi, Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and the now retired J Chelameswar - said that Misra’s system of allocating certain cases was faulty and politically motivated. As he takes on the post of CJI, one of Gogoi’s first tasks will to be clean the SC’s image and improving the roster system of case allocation.

Here are 5 things you should know about Ranjan Gogoi, the new Chief Justice of India

<img class="gwt-Image" src="/photo/48711215.cms" /> 
Finally the Supreme Court of India stands by the commuters who have to encounter highways dotted with potholes in many parts of India. The experience of travelling on a bad highway is gravely painful. The bench of Justices T S Thakur and Kurian Joseph, while hearing a case of a poorly maintained 26-km Raipur-Durg stretch on NH-53 said, "no toll for bad roads". The <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=nhai">National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)</a> and concessionaires cannot collect toll from commuters if the road is in bad shape. 
 
Road users have had a long-standing grouse that they were fleeced by concessionaires who charged hefty toll on stretches of dilapidated national highways. They also believed that private contractors were enriching themselves while the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=nhai">NHAI looked the other way</a>. 
"General public should not be made to suffer on both counts - bad roads and hefty toll," the bench said while ordering the concessionaire to refund Rs 11 crore it had collected as toll to the central government, which had taken over the road from the private party in March. 
 
The central government wanted defended saying, it had acted reasonably by reducing the toll by 60% since taking over the highway for repair work. But the court refused to allow commuters to pay any charges when the condition of the 26-km stretch was poor. 
 
However, the Centre pleaded that the road is motorable in quite some parts. The bench then approved the collection of toll at 40% of the earlier rate and directed that the new toll would be 20% of the earlier fee. 
Lal Manohar Pandey had filed a petition in Chhattisgarh High Court complaining against the pot-holed 26-km Raipur-Durg stretch, on which the concessionaire extracted hefty toll. The HC order was challenged in the SC by the private contractor. 
 
The <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=ministry+of+road+transport+">ministry of road transport</a> had collaborated with DSC Ventures Pvt Ltd on May 8, 2003 for construction, operation and maintenance of Raipur-Durg section of NH-53 on a build, operate and transfer basis. 
 
(Image: VM Win) 
<a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/8-Super-ExpresswaysIn-North-India-That-Fulfil-Your-Need-For-Speed/articleshow/29486214.cms">Also read: 8 Super Expressways in North India</a>

You Searched For "Kurian Joseph" and got 8 results

A WhatsApp group helps airlift ailing IT UK professional back to Kerala

IANS

Supreme Court Cancels All But Four Coal Blocks Allocated Since 1993

TOI

SC Orders BSES Yamuna To Clear Rs 257 Crore Dues By July 15

BI India Bureau

Telecos will not compensate for call drops as Supreme Court strikes down TRAI order

BI India Bureau

SC issues notice to Vijay Mallya, asks to respond within four weeks

BI India Bureau

SC issues notice to Vijay Mallya, his presence may not be required in the court

BI India Bureau

Here are 5 things you should know about Ranjan Gogoi, the new Chief Justice of India

Dilsher Dhillon

If you think the road’s been badly maintained, simply don’t pay toll! Yes, the Supreme Court order says so

BI India Bureau