The Supreme Court\u00a0expressed its displeasure that the Delhi High Court \u00a0was hearing the matters relating to the 2G spectrum scam despite its order restraining courts below the apex BSE 0.00%\u00a0court from adjudicating issues arising out of the case.<\/p>\n
According to \u00a0justices G S Singhvi and K S Radhakrishnan,\u00a0“Despite injunction the Delhi High Court has entertained petition relating to the 2G spectrum case.<\/p>\n
It is very surprising on the part of the behaviour of the High Court”<\/p>\n
CBI counsel\u00a0K K Venugopal said the bench can pass an order and stay any such proceedings.<\/p>\n
The bench said an application can be filed by the CBI so that it can give a clear-cut order. “We will hear your application”<\/p>\n
“We will make it clear that no court will entertain any petition (on the 2G case),” the bench said after senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who is representing Essar Group\u00a0in the case against them, sought clarification on the injunction order. Rohatgi said the legal right available to the affected parties cannot be taken away and one such right was to approach the High Court.<\/p>\n
He said it was for Parliament to make or amend laws and the legal rights available cannot be denied.<\/p>\n
“We cannot say anything for Parliament to amend laws. Law making is in their domain,” the bench observed.<\/p>\n
The remarks of the bench came in the wake of the High Court yesterday entertaining the petition filed by Essar Group promoters.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
BY PTI<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Supreme Court\u00a0expressed its displeasure that the Delhi High Court \u00a0was hearing the matters relating to the 2G spectrum scam despite its order restraining courts below the apex BSE 0.00%\u00a0court from adjudicating issues arising out of the case. According to \u00a0justices G S Singhvi and K S Radhakrishnan,\u00a0“Despite injunction the Delhi High Court has entertained […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":21,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[1729,18461,255,7572,18690,18689,5323,47726],"class_list":["post-24458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-top-law-news","tag-2g-spectrum-case","tag-advocate-mukul-rohatgi","tag-delhi-high-court","tag-essar-group","tag-essar-group-promoters","tag-justices-g-s-singhvi-and-k-s-radhakrishnan","tag-k-k-venugopal","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\n