Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The plaintiff is aggrieved by the incident which occurred at her residence on 26-07-2024 in the late evening, after she withdrew her participation from a live debate programme (‘live debate’) hosted by Rajdeep Sardesai premised on ‘Kargil Diwas’ and ‘Agniveers’, telecasted at 9:00 PM on India Today Television.
Amit Malviya had filed a criminal defamation complaint before the Patiala House Court against Santanu Sinha, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (‘RSS’) member, regarding Facebook posts made by him.
The direction for taking down the impugned video was necessary since India Today was unable to state whether or not Rajdeep Sardesai had been authorized to use the impugned video.
GCMMF has been given liberty by the Court to intimate all three platforms of any other URL containing the impugned post/video apart from the ones enlisted in the plaint, which would have to be deleted by them within 36 hours.
The petition was filed by a company licensed to manufacture and trade Pan Masala brands like Rajnigandha, Tansen, and Mastaba seeking a declaration that Regulation 2(i) of Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Second Amendment Regulations, 2022 be declared as illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g).
The Delhi High Court said that the non-appearance of the defendants evidenced their unwillingness to participate in the forensic examination and verification of their claims of the dead insect made in the social media posts.
The Delhi High Court said that the issuance of a commitment letter does not make the issuer a ‘bidder’ in the tender process.
The Delhi High Court directed the petition to be treated as a representation to the Chief Secretary, Government, State (NCT of Delhi).
“The petitioner having participated in the impugned tender process is entitled to know the reasons for the disqualification of its bid and not providing these answers is contrary to the requirement of transparency.”
The Court dismissed the petition on the ground of non-maintainability as only non-appointees can assail the legality of the appointment or extension procedure.
Delhi High Court stated that since the legislature in its wisdom has elected to impose this duty on the manufacturer and the pharmacist, we do not find any ground for issuing a direction as prayed for in this PIL as it would amount to judicial legislation.
“The aviation sector being a capital-intensive sector, the regulated free play given to the airlines to implement dynamic pricing of the fares for each flight appears to be in conformity with the norms followed worldwide and appears to be essential growth of the said sector.”
The Delhi High Court opined that tendering authority has the power to determine the terms on which tender will be given, unless the terms are not arbitrary and discriminating, the Court cannot scrutinize them.