[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: Exasperated by attorneys who fueled the imagination and unveiled a series of PILs seeking varied directions for the government on how to handle emergency situations during the shutdown, the Supreme Court said Thursday that these advocates appear to have forgotten the premises. basic for which the PIL was created Three decades ago.
A bank of judges N V Ramana, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and B R Gavai said: “The whole concept of PIL is forgotten. Lawyers continue to present PIL based on their own perceptions. This is not PIL.” More than three decades ago, the SC had created a special PIL instrument, somewhat similar to class action lawsuits in the US. USA, to allow an individual or NGO to move to the Supreme Court in search of protection for the rights of the oppressed, voiceless, indigent or a group of people who have no means to express their complaint. In 2010, the SC, by judgment, had provided a 10-point checklist to eliminate self-interest, advertising interest, and frivolous PILs.
Since March 25, the SC has been holding hearings via videoconferencing and has primarily dealt with PILs related to issues related to health management, the economy, finances, and human issues during the shutdown. SC in most cases has sent the requests as representations to the government for consideration.
On Thursday, a group of PILs, all filed by lawyers, sought to find flaws in the March 27 RBI circular asking banks to defer the EMI deduction for loans taken by people during the shutdown period, as there was uncertainty. on income. The first group of PILs was fired by the bank headed by Judge Ramana saying that none of the petitioner-attorneys represented real borrowers who might find the circular beneficial or problematic. However, he kept the question of the validity of the RBI circular open for consideration of an appropriate petition.
Another PIL said many were wronged by banks that failed to implement the RBI March 27 circular on the EMI moratorium. The bank said: “We order the Reserve Bank of India to ensure the implementation of the Circular dated 03/27/2020 in its letter and spirit.”
Another NGO PIL ‘People for Better Treatment’ sought immediate changes in treatment guidelines for seriously ill Covid patients in the ICU receiving a combination of MCQ and AZM as recommended by doctors in Western countries. The bank said it has no experience in the field and could not give instructions to the government or the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR). However, it agreed to forward the request to the ICMR for consideration through Attorney General Tushar Mehta.
Another PIL sought to provide ration to those who do not have a ration card and also called for the universalization of the Public Distribution System. The bank said this is a matter of policy, to be considered by the Union and state governments.
[ad_2]
A bank of judges N V Ramana, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and B R Gavai said: “The whole concept of PIL is forgotten. Lawyers continue to present PIL based on their own perceptions. This is not PIL.” More than three decades ago, the SC had created a special PIL instrument, somewhat similar to class action lawsuits in the US. USA, to allow an individual or NGO to move to the Supreme Court in search of protection for the rights of the oppressed, voiceless, indigent or a group of people who have no means to express their complaint. In 2010, the SC, by judgment, had provided a 10-point checklist to eliminate self-interest, advertising interest, and frivolous PILs.
Since March 25, the SC has been holding hearings via videoconferencing and has primarily dealt with PILs related to issues related to health management, the economy, finances, and human issues during the shutdown. SC in most cases has sent the requests as representations to the government for consideration.
On Thursday, a group of PILs, all filed by lawyers, sought to find flaws in the March 27 RBI circular asking banks to defer the EMI deduction for loans taken by people during the shutdown period, as there was uncertainty. on income. The first group of PILs was fired by the bank headed by Judge Ramana saying that none of the petitioner-attorneys represented real borrowers who might find the circular beneficial or problematic. However, he kept the question of the validity of the RBI circular open for consideration of an appropriate petition.
Another PIL said many were wronged by banks that failed to implement the RBI March 27 circular on the EMI moratorium. The bank said: “We order the Reserve Bank of India to ensure the implementation of the Circular dated 03/27/2020 in its letter and spirit.”
Another NGO PIL ‘People for Better Treatment’ sought immediate changes in treatment guidelines for seriously ill Covid patients in the ICU receiving a combination of MCQ and AZM as recommended by doctors in Western countries. The bank said it has no experience in the field and could not give instructions to the government or the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR). However, it agreed to forward the request to the ICMR for consideration through Attorney General Tushar Mehta.
Another PIL sought to provide ration to those who do not have a ration card and also called for the universalization of the Public Distribution System. The bank said this is a matter of policy, to be considered by the Union and state governments.
