High Court upholds appointment of State law commission chief

High Court upholds appointment of State law commission chief

The High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of Justice S R Nayak, former chairman of the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission, as the chairman of the Karnataka State Law Commission.

Hearing a PIL petition by H M Farookh, a native of Sampangi in Kolar district, a division bench comprising Justices K L Manjunath and S Sujatha dismissed the petition, stating that there is no merit in the petition.

The petitioner had submitted that by appointing Justice Nayak as chairman of the Law Commission on June 26, 2014, the government had violated Section 24(3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. 

“The Act says that on ceasing to hold office, a chairperson or member of Human Rights Commission shall become ineligible for further employment under any state government or Government of India,” said counsel for the petitioner M R Balakrishna.

He pointed out that the appointment being under State government, it amounts to violation of the Act. Advocate General Ravivarma Kumar submitted that the post of chairman, Law Commission is an autonomous post and does not come under the State government.  

"There is no master-servant relation in this and therefore Section 24(3) of the Human Rights Act does not apply to it,” he said. The bench, accepting this submission, dismissed the petition.

Notice to Centre, oil firms

The High Court has ordered notice to the Union government and the oil companies, in connection with a petition seeking that the oil prices in the country be regulated.

Hearing a petition by city-based advocate N P Amrutesh, the division bench comprising Justices K L Manjunath and S Sujatha ordered the notice. The petitioner had moved the court seeking regulation of the oil prices, stating that despite the decrease in prices, the same was not being passed on to the consumers.

Noting that petroleum products had been declared as essential commodity under the Essential Commodity Act, 1955, the petitioner said that the respondents - by hiking prices of petroleum products - had hurt the interests of the public. The petitioner has sought directions to constitute a committee comprising of experts in the fields of law, accountancy and others to regulate and ensure accountability and transparency in regulating the prices. 

The petitioner contends that when he obtained an information through RTI Act, he found that the cost of producing diesel through acquisition, blending amounts to Rs 13.25 per litre, to be sold at the outlets.

Liked the story?

  • 0

    Happy
  • 0

    Amused
  • 0

    Sad
  • 0

    Frustrated
  • 0

    Angry