Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and elections commissioners will be done by the President on the advice of a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the opposition in the <keyword id="6355187" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="lok-sabha" source="Orion">Lok Sabha</keyword> and the Chief Justice of India. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice <keyword id="3333505" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="km-joseph" source="Orion">KM Joseph</keyword>, in a unanimous verdict, held that this norm will continue to hold good till a law on the issue is made by Parliament. The apex court said if the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha is not there, then the leader of the single largest opposition party will be in the committee to appoint the Chief Election Commissioner and elections commissioners. The bench delivered its verdict on a batch of pleas seeking a collegium-like system for the appointment of election commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner. The bench, also comprising Justices Ajay <keyword id="5149" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="rastogi" source="Orion">Rastogi</keyword>, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh <keyword id="715" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="roy" source="Orion">Roy</keyword> and CT Ravikumar, stressed purity in the election process and said democracy is intrinsically linked to the will of people. Justice Rastogi, who concurred with the lead judgement authored by Justice Joseph, delivered a separate verdict with his reasoning. The apex court said that election in a democracy should undoubtedly be fair and the buck stops with the <keyword id="40807" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="election-commission" source="Orion">Election Commission</keyword> to ensure that its purity is maintained. It said in a democracy, the purity of election must be maintained or else it would lead to disastrous consequences. The bench said the Election Commission must act within the constitutional framework and within the law and it cannot act in an unfair manner. It said that an Election Commission, which does not ensure a free and fair role in the process, guarantees the breakdown of rule of law, which is the bedrock of democracy. The bench said that democracy is fragile and would collapse if "lip service" is paid to rule of law. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/truth-will-prevail-adani-group-welcomes-supreme-court-order-on-hindenburg-issue/articleshow/98356259.cms">'Truth will prevail', Adani group welcomes Supreme Court order on Hindenburg issue</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/health/news/hyderabad-to-install-1400-defibrillators-in-public-places-as-cardiac-arrests-rise/articleshow/98355908.cms">Hyderabad to install 1,400 defibrillators in public places as cardiac arrests rise</a>

President to appoint CEC, ECs on advise of committee comprising PM, LoP & CJI: SC

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the petition seeking to constitute a "<keyword id="16471584" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="renaming-commission" source="Orion">Renaming Commission</keyword>" to find out original names of 'ancient historical cultural religious places and remarked that <keyword id="3658" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="india" source="Orion">India</keyword> is a secular country and Hinduism is a way of life, because of that India has assimilated everybody. Supreme Court bench comprising Justice <keyword id="3333505" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="km-joseph" source="Orion">KM Joseph</keyword> and Justice BV <keyword id="620466" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="nagarathna" source="Orion">Nagarathna</keyword> expressed its unhappiness with the petitioner and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay and said that such petitions should not be entertained. "Hinduism is a way of life, and that was the reason, India has assimilated everybody and therefore we are able to live together," said Justice BV Nagarathna. Justice Nagarathna mentioned the divide-and-rule policy brought by the British in the country and remarked that "let us not break it again with such kind of petitions". The court remarked not to dig up the past as it would only create disharmony and they can't allow the country on the boil. Justice KM Joseph, who was heading the bench, said, "In Kerala, the state where I belong to, the Hindu king has donated the land to build churches". The court said that our country is secular and supposed to protect the Constitution and remarked that the petitioner is concerned about the past and digging it up to place its burden on the present generation. "The history of any nation cannot haunt the present and future generations of a nation to the point that succeeding generations become prisoners of the past," said the court. Justice KM Joseph said that there is no bigotry in Hinduism. Trying to convince the bench, petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay said, "Hindus have become a minority in many historical places. The country has roads after Lodhi, Ghazni, Ghori and other invaders but there is no single road named after Pandavas." In reply to the petitioner, the court said, "Keep the country in mind, not any religion. A country cannot remain a prisoner of the past and the government is wedded to rule of law, secularism, and constitutionalism." "Being a Christian, he is equally fond of Hinduism, which is the greatest religion in terms of metaphysics. The country should be proud of that", added Justice Joseph. The petitioner has sought to constitute a "Renaming Commission" to find out the original names of 'ancient historical cultural religious places', named after barbaric foreign invaders in order to maintain <keyword id="502906" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="sovereignty" source="Orion">Sovereignty</keyword> and to secure the 'Right to Dignity, Right to Religion and Right to Culture. Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay has sought to issue appropriate direction to the Home Ministry to constitute a "Renaming Commission" to find out the original names of 'ancient historical cultural religious places', named after barbaric foreign invaders in order to maintain Sovereignty and to secure 'Right to Dignity, Right to Religion and Right to Culture' guaranteed under Articles 21, 25 and 29 of the Constitution. Alternatively, the petitioner has urged the court to direct the Archaeological Survey of India to research and publish the initial names of ancient historical-cultural religious places, which were renamed by barbaric foreign invaders, to secure the 'Right to Know' guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution. The petition has urged the court to direct the Centre and State Governments to update their websites and records and mention the original names of ancient historical cultural religious places, named after the barbaric foreign invaders. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/news/hyundai-creta-bajaj-pulsar-emerge-as-the-most-popular-car-and-bike-droom-report/articleshow/98275912.cms">Hyundai Creta, Bajaj Pulsar emerge as the most popular car and bike: Droom report</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/corporates/news/stock-price-run-up-in-paytm-nykaa-zomato-pb-fintech-delhivery-could-see-large-shareholders-cashing-out-bofa/articleshow/98274102.cms">Stock price run up in Paytm, Nykaa, Zomato, PB Fintech &amp; Delhivery could see large shareholders cashing out - BofA</a>

SC dismisses plea to constitute "Renaming Commission"; says India a secular country

The Supreme Court has said that the Constitution has vested enormous powers on the "fragile shoulder" of the <keyword id="50926" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Election-Commissioner" source="Orion">Chief Election Commissioner</keyword> (CEC) and the two Election Commissioners (ECs) and stressed on the "fair and transparent mechanism" so that the "best man" is appointed as the CEC. A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Justice KM Joseph told Attorney General R Venkataramani, who appeared in the matter on behalf of the Centre, that it is important that through a "fairly good procedure someone of strong character is appointed" as the CEC. Venkataramtold the bench that nobody can have any objection to it and even the government is not going to oppose the appointment of the best man, but the question is how can it be done. "Enormous power has been vested on the fragile shoulder of three men (two ECs and the CEC). We have to find the best man for the post of CEC. The question is how do we find that best man and how to appoint that best man," the apex court said. The bench also comprising justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar, said that the absence of a law for the appointment of Election Commissioners has resulted in an "alarming trend". It pointed out that Article 324 (2) mandates the framing of law for the selection and appointment of CEC and ECs but nothing had been done in the last seven decades. "This is how the silence of the Constitution is being exploited," the bench added. Justice Joseph remarked, "It's a very, very disturbing trend. After TN Seshan (who was CEC for six years between 1990 and 1996), the slide began when no person has been given a full term. What the government has been doing is that because it knows the date of birth, it ensures that anyone who is appointed as the CEC does not get his full six years... Be it the UPA government or this government, this has been a trend." The apex court was hearing pleas challenging the constitutionality of the present appointment process of CEC and ECs and contended that appointments were being done as per the whims and fancies of the executive. The petitions sought the creation of an independent collegium or selection committee for future appointments of CEC and two other ECs. The petitions stated that unlike the appointments of the CBI director or Lokpal, where the leader of the Opposition and judiciary have a say, the Centre unilaterally appoints the members of the Election Commission. The apex court referred PILs to the Constitution bench on October 23, 2018. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/inox-green-energy-services-lists-at-6-92-discount-lower-than-grey-market-expectations/articleshow/95703045.cms">Inox Green Energy Services lists at 6.92% discount, lower than grey market expectations</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/sensex-nifty50-open-higher-amid-positive-global-cues-nykaa-inox-green-adani-enterprises-among-stocks-in-focus/articleshow/95702219.cms">Sensex, Nifty50 open higher amid positive global cues: Nykaa, Inox Green, Adani Enterprises among stocks in focus</a>

Fair, transparent mechanism required to appoint someone of strong character as Chief Election Commissioner: SC

<ul><li>A purchaser of a mineral bottling plant that was auctioned refused to pay overdue <keyword id="769626" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Electricity-dues">electricity dues</keyword> which were unpaid by the previous owner.</li><li>Seeking to quash the electricity authority’s demands, the purchaser approached the Telangana High Court, which granted him relief.</li><li>Later, a Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph overruled the High Court’s judgment, fixing the liability on the purchaser of the <keyword id="9339052" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="auctioned-property">auctioned property</keyword>.</li></ul>If you buy a property in an auction and later find out that there were unpaid electricity bills, they are now your’s to pay. While this is generally understood as the norm, it’s something the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> had to reiterate after the Telangana High Court excused the statutory electricity dues of a water bottling plant in the state. The Supreme Court said that <keyword id="9339053" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="purchasers-of-auctioned-property">purchasers of auctioned property</keyword> are liable to pay the statutory electricity dues — especially since the charges were specifically mentioned during the auction. Hearing a case between the auction-purchaser of a water bottling plant in Telangana and the Telangana Electricity Board, the bench — which included Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph — ruled that in this specific case, the buyer of the property was liable to pay to statutory electricity dues which were unpaid by the previous owner. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="74704591" title="Vodafone India’s revenues are getting stronger after tariff hikes but its fate is still linked to Supreme Court orders" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> What is the case about? The case is about the payment of statutory dues by the purchaser of an auctioned property. In this particular instance, the purchaser refused to pay statutory electricity dues which were unpaid by the previous owner. The purchaser applied for a new electricity connection, but the authorities refused to provide the connection on the grounds that there were outstanding dues to be paid. Seeking to quash these demands made by the authorities, the purchaser approached the Telangana High Court, which subsequently granted relief. What did the Supreme Court say? The case was subsequently raised by the Telangana Electricity Board in the Supreme Court, which observed that the purchaser was liable to clear the dues. In its observation, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/who-is-liable-to-pay-outstanding-statutory-electricity-dues-after-auction-sale-of-property-supreme-court-answers">said</a>, “Where, as in cases of the E-auction notice in question, the existence of electricity dues, whether quantified or not, has been specifically mentioned as a liability of the purchaser and the sale is on “as is where is, whatever there is and without recourse basis”, there can be no doubt that the liability to pay electricity dues exists on the respondent (purchaser).” Who does it affect? The ruling made by the Supreme Court affects anyone purchasing any property in an auction. More specifically, during the auction, the auctioneer will have to mention specifically that the property is being sold on an “as is” basis, just like in the case above. If this is explicitly mentioned, the purchaser of the property will inherit all the liabilities and assets associated with the property. The purchaser will also have no recourse in this regard. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/indias-supreme-court-wont-allow-4g-internet-in-jammu-and-kashmir/articleshow/75670549.cms">India's Supreme Court won't allow 4G in Jammu and Kashmir⁠— despite petitioners' plea that it's essential for healthcare, education and business during the coronavirus lockdown</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-asks-states-to-consider-home-delivery-of-liquor-amid-lockdown/articleshow/75626269.cms">Supreme Court asks states to consider home delivery of liquor amid lockdown</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/indian-supreme-courts-ego-is-coming-in-the-way-of-peace-between-the-government-and-telcos/articleshow/74687878.cms">Indian Supreme Court's ego is coming in the way of peace between the government and telcos</a>

You Searched For "km joseph" and got 4 results

President to appoint CEC, ECs on advise of committee comprising PM, LoP & CJI: SC

PTI

SC dismisses plea to constitute "Renaming Commission"; says India a secular country

ANI

Fair, transparent mechanism required to appoint someone of strong character as Chief Election Commissioner: SC

ANI

India’s Supreme Court says those who buy auctioned property will have to pay prior electricity bills

Rounak Jain

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides