Anonymous
21 November 2011 at 15:42
hi,
i am an ayurvedic dr (BAMS,MD,$ PhD) and i want to start my Ayurvedic research centre in Goa. i like to know what are the formalities or legal aspect or i need to take permission from any Govt. dept etc. to open my own research centre.
please help.
thanks
Anonymous
21 November 2011 at 00:18
I have often heard and read this term even on LCI--but do not know the meaning--please explain in lay men's language
Rajkumar
20 November 2011 at 19:23
Railways sell the scrap iron through auction. The contractor who took it in auction is imposed with a condition to remove the materials within 60 days or else Railways says ground rent will be charged @ Rs.2000/- per day for first 15 days and Rs.5000/- from 16 th day to 31days and thereafter Rs.20,000/- per day. Is it open to the Railways to impose such a condition which in fact amounts to compulsory exaction in the form of tax. The Railways Act does not seem to authorise them to impose such ground rent. While so levying such rent in the form of ground rent is legal?
Anonymous
20 November 2011 at 07:21
Dear Experts,
This query is to get your independent opinions regarding Sections 34(1),(2)and (3) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 visa vis Arms Act 1959 and fundamental rights. Wildlife Protection Act 1972 can be read at http://envfor.nic.in/legis/wildlife/wildlife1.html
My position will be that arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 supported by reasoning put forth in following links and High Court judgements as well as but not limited to doctrine of precedence, natural justice, strict scrutiny etc.:
1) Judgements of High Courts http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15638 and http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15639
2) http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/RKBA-guaranteed-under-Articles-19-and-21-of-Constitution-36011.asp
I want to establish Sections 34(1),(2)and (3) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 to be unreasonable, superfluous and ultra vires.
Following is the zist of my reasoning:
Section 34(1) and (2) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 are putting unreasonable, unnecessary and needless burden on arms license holders when arms are already well regulated under Arms Act 1959 and information about all arms license holders in the area is already present with the District Magistrate.
Liberty is guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution. Liberty includes not be be put under unnecessary, unreasonable burden, harassment or insult. Arms licenses or exemptions from licenses are issued to law abiding citizens by following the due process of law and putting all of them under unreasonable burden and suspicion amounts to treating them like criminals is affront to them and their Liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. Chief Wildlife Warden without any reasonable suspicion asking all arms license holders to line up at his office under Section 34(1) and (2) of of Wildlife Protection Act 1972, amounts to insult and harassment of arms license holders.
If he ever has credible evidence about violation of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 with help of arms against any person, he is anyways free to request information related to arms license from the District Magistrate or file a case in appropriate court of law.
Moreover since arms are a fundamental right, the Chief Wildlife Warden can safely assume that since arms are fundamental right, every citizen who is not barred by law from possessing arms, is in possession of arms. Section 34(3) is ultra vires and superfluous since arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution and hence every citizen unless disqualified under Section 14 of Arms Act 1959 is entitled to keep and bear arms as per law. Where is the need to require concurrence of Chief Wildlife Warden when there is already a provision for police report about the arms license applicant?
jitender
18 November 2011 at 13:49
dear members, require your expert advice,
can a Single bench of HC sitting in writ jurisdiction, refuse to consider the judgement of the same HC delivered in a civil suit in the exactly same facts and circumstances merely becoz that judegemnt was passed in civil suit....and preposition of law laid down by the HC in civil suit will not apply to writ petitions.....
please provide the opinions as well as the case law if possible....
jitender
18 November 2011 at 13:45
dear members, require your expert advice,
can a Single bench of HC sitting in writ jurisdiction, refuse to consider the judgement of the same HC delivered in a civil suit in the exactly same facts and circumstances merely becoz that judegemnt was passed in civil suit....and preposition of law laid down by the HC in civil suit will not apply to writ petitions.....
please provide the opinions as well as the case law if possible....
Rohith Reddy
18 November 2011 at 01:53
we are studying in a private deemed university with compulsory residential. We are being deprived of our fundamental right to smoke and they use breath analyzer at campus gate to screen people if they are drunk randomly, are there any guidelines as per constitution as of can our university making their own set of rules and depriving us of our right (coz we are being punished if we exercise our rights) can we move legal against the institution about these things
Anonymous
17 November 2011 at 12:04
Respected Experts, need your inputs for my case:
I had first filed divorce case on the grounds of cruelty which was immediately followed by 498a case against me & my family. All are out on bail now. Chargesheet not yet filed.
Girl not attending in person, divorce case dates, her lawyer is putting petition on all dates giving one pretext or the other for her absence.
498a related concerns:
1). The FIR doesn't contain any event at her city, events are of my city.Can 498a case be transferred from her city to my city based on jurisdiction, for trial.
2). If I go for quashing of the FIR, is there any possibility that she can again file another 498a after adding new masala. Under what section of law this is not allowed.
3). If the FIR quashing is on the grounds of jurisdiction, can she go & refile another 498a in the another jurisdiction (this time she will make sure that jurisdiction matter is taken care of) ?
4). Chargesheet has not been filed yet, can I file discharge petition u/s 239 ? Other than quashing, do I have any other option before filing of chargesheet (as police is delaying the filing of chargesheet, which is giving the girl's side enough time to plan).
Thanks & Regards !
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Statutory complaint under army act 27
Can Chief of Army Staff dispose of a Statutory Complaint made under AA section 27 addsd to Govt of India? If Yes under what provisions? If No what is the remedy if COAS has done it?