Can’t be allowed to re-appear in exam on ground of being

Can't be allowed to re-appear in exam on ground of being
Can’t be allowed to re-appear in exam on ground of being

The Delhi High Court has upheld cancellation of admission of a student to third year of an under-graduation course at Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSIPU), saying there is no question of giving him another chance only on the ground of being a Scheduled Caste.

“In the instant case, since the appellant was found ineligible after second academic break, his admission stood automatically cancelled. Therefore, there is no question of any further chance only on the ground of being an SC/ST,” a division bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and V P Vaish said.

Dismissing the plea of Gourav Joshiya, who was pursuing Bachelor of Technology from Amity School of Engineering and Technology, the bench said he was ineligible for admission to third year as he could not clear the previous four semesters.

It upheld the single judge order refusing another chance to the student for clearing the exams and said the opportunity would have been given to him if he had been able to satisfy the necessary eligibility criteria.

“To attain an egalitarian society, we have to urgently remove socio-economic inequalities. Therefore, in order to promote these weaker sections of the society an educational institution must take all endeavours by providing any form of additional assistance in order to bring them up at par with general category students.

“The appeal of the appellant may have been allowed on this ground alone, if he would have been able to satisfy necessary eligibility criteria for continuance of his admission with the respondents,” it said.

Gourav had challenged a single judge order of May 25, 2015 denying him a chance to re-appear in the examinations to get admitted to the third year.

In his appeal, the student, who got admitted to the college in 2010, had claimed he had sent a mercy application to the university’s committee concerned in October 2014, but through a notification on November 7, 2014, it was rejected and his admission was also cancelled.

He had contended that the single judge has misconceived that he had to appear in 10 papers in May-June 2015, whereas he had to appear in five.

The university, however, said there was delay in filing the writ petition by the student as he filed it in April 2015, but the admission was cancelled in November 2014.

It also told the court that during academic year 2012-13 and 2013-14, the appellant had reappeared in the failed papers of first year and second year but could not clear them and hence failed to secure minimum credits for promotion to third year.

Airhostess case: Notice to police on plea to cancel Kanda’s bail

Airhostess caseThe Delhi High Court Monday issued notice to police on a plea of former air hostess Geetika Sharma’s brother seeking cancellation of bail to former Haryana minister Gopal Goyal Kanda, who was in jail for the past 18 months after being accused of abetting her suicide.

Justice V.P. Vaish sought Delhi Police’s reply by April 17.

Approaching the high court, Sharma’s brother contended that Kanda is an influential person and while on bail, will try to tamper with evidence and influence the witnesses.

Asking the court to cancel the bail given to Kanda, he said that the trial court has not taken into consideration all the aspects while granting him bail.

The trial court March 4 allowed the bail application of Kanda while observing that he was in judicial custody since August 2012.

The high court had earlier dropped the charge of sexual exploitation against him.

Kanda and his aide Aruna Chadha are accused of abetting the Aug 4-5, 2012, suicide of a 23-year-old former air hostess who left behind a note accusing the duo of harassing her.

Chadha and Kanda have been charged with abetting suicide, criminal conspiracy, forgery and hacking computers and sending offensive or false messages.

The Delhi High Court Feb 10 had granted regular bail to Chadha.


HC to hear AAP plea over complaint against Dikshit

sheila dixshitThe Delhi High Court Monday decided to hear a plea by the now former AAP government to withdraw an earlier petition against a trial court order for lodging a complaint against former chief minister Sheila Dikshit for alleged misusing government funds ahead of the 2008 assembly polls.

Justice V.P. Vaish posted the matter for Feb 26 after the city government counsel informed the court that another judge has already heard and reserved the verdict on the issue.

The application, seeking withdrawal of the plea, said: “The cabinet has taken a decision that it has no more locus to defend Sheila Dikshit. The Lt. Governor has also approved the cabinet decision.”

The plea filed Feb 14, hours before Arvind Kejriwal resigned from the post of Delhi chief minister, said the cabinet has taken a decision that in corruption cases, the government will not defend anyone.

Since Dikshit is not holding any government post, no sanction would be required to prosecute her.

Last year, the Dikshit government had moved the high court, seeking quashing of a trial court order for ordering a First Information Report against her. The high court then stayed the registration of FIR against Dikshit.

The special court, Aug 31, directed Delhi Police to register an FIR against Dikshit on the complaint of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Vijender Gupta and a similar plea of Right to Information activist Vivek Garg, alleging that Dikshit had misused Rs.22.56 crore in government funds in an advertisement campaign prior to the 2008 polls.

They sought registration of FIR against Dikshit and others for alleged criminal breach of trust (section 409 of the Indian Penal Code), criminal misappropriation of public funds and criminal misconduct under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

It said Dikshit was chief minister and also minister in-charge of information and publicity when the alleged fund misuse took place in 2007-08.

Gupta, in his complaint, said it was an election year and a number of government advertisements were published in newspapers.

The BJP leader said he filed a complaint before Delhi Lokayukta Justice Manmohan Sarin, who indicted Dikshit for misusing government funds for carrying out an advertisement campaign with a “political purpose” ahead of the polls.

He said the Lokayukta recommended to President Pranab Mukherjee to caution Dikshit for the alleged misuse of public funds and to “advise” her to reimburse either by herself or through her party a sum of Rs.11 crore as half the cost of the advertisements in 2008 or any amount the president found adequate.


File status on cash-for-vote scam accused: Delhi HC to police

delhi-high-courtThe Delhi High Court Friday issued notice to police on a plea by a former aide of Rajya Sabha member Amar Singh, seeking quashing of corruption charges framed against him in the cash-for-vote scam of 2008.

Justice V.P. Vaish asked Delhi Police to file a status report on petitioner Sanjeev Saxena’s plea against whom a trial court framed corruption charges Nov 22 last year.

Saxena moved the high court seeking quashing of the charges, charge sheet and the proceedings in the case.

In November 2013, a trial court had discharged former Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh, three Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MPs Faggan Singh Kulaste, Mahavir Bhagora and Ashok Argal, as well as Sudheendra Kulkarni, a former close aide of BJP leader L.K. Advani, and BJP activist Sohail Hindustani.

The court, however, framed corruption charges against Saxena saying that there was sufficient ground for presuming that Saxena has committed offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On July 22, 2008, Kulaste, Bhagora and Argal waved wads of currency notes in the Lok Sabha ahead of a trust vote, alleging they were given the money to vote in favour of the Manmohan Singh government.

Challenging the order of framing of charges against him, Saxena said there was no evidence that at any stage he conspired with any abettor or any public servant.

“If the judge has discharged him even for an offence of conspiracy, then the court on the basis of presumptions cannot frame a new charge against him…,” the plea said.

“There is nothing to show that there was any offer of any bribe or illegal gratification and as such the petitioner (Saxena) cannot be said to have abetted the offence under Section 7 or 11 of Prevention of Corruption Act,” it added.

The trial court said: “… he (Saxena) was caught on camera handing over the amount to the three BJP MPs. There is no evidence of meeting of minds with any other persons.”

On Amar Singh, the court said circumstances against him do not go beyond the “realm of suspicion”.

The court discharged all the accused except Saxena in the cash-for-vote scam.

In its first charge sheet filed in August 2011, Delhi Police had accused Amar Singh and Kulkarni of conspiring and masterminding the cash-for-vote scam to bribe some MPs ahead of the confidence vote.

The case was registered in 2009 on the recommendation of a parliamentary panel which had probed the scam.

All the accused were booked under various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and for criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code.

Argal, Kulaste and Bhagora had earlier claimed it was a sting operation to highlight horse-trading in parliament ahead of the trust vote.

(Source: IANS)

Notice to CBI on arms dealer’s plea to go abroad

delhi-high-courtThe Delhi High Court Thursday issued notice to the CBI on a plea of arms dealer Suresh Nanda, father of BMW hit-and-run case convict Sanjeev Nanda, seeking permission to go abroad for three months for business purpose.
Justice V.P. Vaish sought response of the CBI by Jan 29, the next date of hearing. Nanda, son of former navy chief, the late Admiral S.M. Nanda, moved the high court seeking modification of a trial court order of Dec 21 last year which allowed him to travel abroad for only six days, from Dec 23 to 28.
Filing the petition, Nanda said he has to travel from Jan 2 to March 31 to Dubai, London, Europe and Thailand for business purpose. He also pleaded that on several occasions, he was granted permission to travel abroad and he never misused the liberty given to him.
“On Dec 15, 2013, a letter from M/S Buckrow Asset Management LLP informed the petitioner (Nanda) that business meetings and conferences are fixed between Dec 2 to March 31 in Dubai, London, Europe and Thailand. If petitioner would not attend the meetings, the company has threatened to terminate the consultancy agreement of the petitioner,” the petition said. Nanda has been accused in several cases.