New Delhi Mar 31 PTI The Supreme Court Thursday asked the Centre to consider the representation of some aspirants who could not appear in the UPSC civil services main examination after being infected with COVID-19 and are now seeking an additional attempt in light of the recommendation made in a recent parliamentary committee reportIn the March 24 report the committee has said that keeping in view the hardships faced by the student community during the first and second waves of COVID-19 it recommends the government to change its mind and sympathetically consider the demand of civil services examination CSE aspirants and grant an extra attempt with corresponding age relaxation to all candidatesThe Centre had last week told the apex court that additional attempt in the Union Public Service Commission UPSC civil services examination is not possibleA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar was hearing a plea filed by three aspirants who had cleared the UPSC 2021 prelims exam but could not appear in all papers of the main exam after testing positive for COVID-19 and are now seeking an extra attempt to appear in the examsAdvocate Prashant Bhushan who was appearing for an intervenor in the matter apprised the apex court about the parliamentary committee reportHas the government considered this committee report before taking the decision the bench also comprising Justices A S Oka and C T Ravikumar askedAdditional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appearing for the Centre said that she do not have instructions on thisYou may consider it in light of this recommendation the bench observed adding it is open for the government to change its mindThe bench asked the petitioners and the intervenor to make representation to the authority which would consider it in light of the committee reportIn light of the recommendation of the parliamentary committee we dispose of this petition and application with a direction to the appropriate authority to re-examine the representations made by the petitioners and similarly placed persons afresh and take appropriate decision the bench said The bench made clear that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matterThe UPSC had recently told the top court there is no provision for holding re-examination in case a candidate fails to appear in the test on the scheduled date for any reasons including ailment or accident incapacitating him to take the examIn its affidavit filed in the court the Centre had said that the CSE is conducted by UPSC annually in accordance with the CSE Rules notified by the Department of Personnel and Training DoPT every year for a particular CSEIt had said the matter of compensatoryextra attempt has been adjudicated by the apex court in the past against the plea of hardships faced by the aspirants due to the COVID-19 pandemic but it was not grantedThe affidavit had referred to the judgement and order passed by the top court last year in February and July 2021 on separate pleasIt had said after the July last year order a number of representations were received in the DoPT putting forth the same demand of compensatoryextra attemptThe matter has been considered and it has not been found feasible to change the existing provisions regarding number of attempts and age-limit in respect of the CSE it had saidIt had said the existing age range for admission to CSE is 21 to 32 years with relaxation for certain categories of candidates and the permissible number of attempts is also six with relaxations for certain categories of candidatesIn its separate affidavit filed in the apex court the UPSC had said that any decision regarding age relaxation and compensatoryextra attempt in the civil services examination is a policy matter which falls under the domain of the DoPTWhile two of the three petitioners had to leave the main exam held from January 7 to 16 in-between after appearing in some initial papers the third aspirant could not appear in any of the papers due to COVIDThe petitioners in their plea filed through advocate Shashank Singh had said that they tested positive for COVID-19 in the RTPCR test reports dated January 13 14 and January 6 respectivelyThe plea had said the petitioners could not take the UPSC mains examination after testing positive for COVID-19 and owing to the restrictions imposed under the strict quarantine guidelines of the governmentAlso there was absence of any kind of policy of UPSC which could provide arrangements for such petitioners who were COVID positive during the span of mains examination or before it it had saidThe petitioners are approaching this court under Article 32 and seeking a direction to the Respondent UPSC to extend them an additional extra attempt to appear in the examination or in alternate make some arrangement to appear in the rest of papers which the petitioners could not give before the publication of result of civil service mains examination 2021 the plea had said PTI ABA SA

New Delhi Feb 24 PTI The Supreme Court Thursday said Attorney General K K Venugopal has circulated a note stating that vacancies in most of the Tribunals have been filled except for the National Green Tribunal Central Administrative Tribunal and some Armed Force Tribunals AFTsA bench of Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justices A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli said the AG has mentioned that some appointments to AFTs and CAT are pending with the selection committee headed by Justice A M KhanwilkarThe apex court made the remarks after senior advocate Arvind Datar mentioned for urgent listing of a plea pertaining to filling of vacancies in the tribunals and challenge to new Tribunal Reforms ActCJI Ramana said Last time Justice Raos bench had passed the judgement in the matter and they had not honoured the verdict and had immediately come out with a similar ActDatar submitted that after the top courts verdict in the Madras Bar Association case the minimum age bar of 50 years in the Tribunals Reforms Act had been struck downHe said several eligible advocates below the age of 50 years are not considered even after the court had said that the age bar of 50 years cannot be applied and such a distinction cannot be madeHe said the court had directed that the tenure of members should be fixed as five years and age of 67 or 70 years but the Centre is making appointments saying it will be four years and 67 or 70 years or until further orders whichever is earlierThis until further orders should be deleted from the appointment letters Once the selection committee headed by a Supreme Court judge has cleared the name the government has no say in the appointment he addedDatar said the Centre maintains that its legislation is supreme and what is shocking is that after the Supreme Court struck down various conditions of appointment in the ordinance they brought identical provisions in the ActThe bench said the matter would be listed for hearing on March 24On September 6 last year the top court had termed the provisions in new law on tribunals replica of those struck down earlierIt had told the Centre that though the government has the power to take away the basis of a judgement by making new laws they cannot be directly contradictory to its verdictsThe legislature can take away the basis of the judgement of the Supreme Court But you cannot make an Act which is directly contradictory to the judgement of the Supreme Court it had saidThe law pertains to terms and conditions of service and tenure of members of various tribunals and revives some of the provisions struck down by a bench headed by Justice Rao last year on pleas including the one filed by Madras Bar AssociationThe top court was critical of the fact that the law was cleared without any discussion in Parliament and had restored the provisions which were struck down and had said the Act is virtually a replica of the provisions which have been struck down in Madras Bar Association cases- II and IIIThe top court had then sought response from the Centre on a batch of petitions including the one filed by Congress leader Jairam Ramesh challenging the Constitutional validity of various provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act 2021 which was passed during the last Monsoon Session of Parliament and received Presidential assent on August 13 2021The Congress leader in his plea said that he has filed the petition in public interest assailing the proviso to Section 31 along with Sections 37 5 and 71 of the Tribunal Reforms Act 2021 as being ultra-vires Articles 14 21 and 50 of the ConstitutionThe Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Act abrogating the principle of judicial independence and its passage being a deliberate attempt to legislatively override the judgement of this Court in Madras Bar Association versus Union of India which set aside provisions identical to those being impugned without removing the basis of the judgement the petition said PTI MNL SA

New Delhi Feb 23 PTI The Supreme Court Wednesday refused to entertain a plea seeking cancellation of offline board examinations for classes 10 and 12 to be conducted by the CBSE and several other boards this yearA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar observed that such petition creates false hope and confusion all overThis creates not only false hopes it creates confusion all over to students who are preparing said the bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T RavikumarLet the students do their job and let the authorities do their jobs the bench observedThe plea had sought directions to the CBSE and other education boards which have proposed to hold board examinations for classes 10 and 12 in offline mode to devise alternate modes of assessmentThe CBSE has decided to conduct term two board exams for class 10 and class 12 from April 26 PTI ABA SA

New Delhi Feb 22 PTI The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it would hear tomorrow a plea seeking cancellation of offline board examinations for classes 10 and 12 to be conducted by the CBSE and several other boards this yearA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar said that advance copy of the petition be served to the standing counsel for the Central Board of Secondary Education CBSE and other respondents concernedThe plea was mentioned for urgent listing before the bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T RavikumarThe counsel appearing for petitioner Anubha Shrivastava Sahai mentioned the matter and requested the bench to list it urgentlyThe plea has sought directions to the CBSE and other education boards which have proposed to hold board examinations for classes 10 and 12 in offline mode for devising other modes of assessmentThe CBSE has decided to conduct term two board exams for class 10 and class 12 from April 26 PTI ABA DV DV

New Delhi Jan 28 PTI Suspending a member of the House or Legislative Assembly beyond the remainder period of ongoing session would impact the democratic setup as a whole by permitting the thin majority or coalition government to manipulate the numbers of the Opposition party in an undemocratic manner the Supreme Court said on FridayIn its judgement delivered on the pleas filed by 12 BJP MLAs who had challenged their one-year suspension from Maharashtra Legislative Assembly for allegedly misbehaving with the presiding officer a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar observed that one-year suspension is worse than expulsion disqualification or resignationIn conclusion we have no hesitation in allowing these writ petitions and to declare that the impugned resolution directing suspension of the petitioners beyond the period of the remainder of the concerned Monsoon session held in July 2021 is non est in the eyes of law nullity unconstitutional substantively illegal and irrational said the bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T RavikumarThe top court declared the resolution to be ineffective in law insofar as the period beyond the remainder of the stated session in which the resolution came to be passedIt said the 12 MLAs are entitled to all consequential benefits of being the members of the Legislative Assembly on and after the expiry of the period of remainder of the concerned sessionThe apex court said that suspension beyond the remainder period of the ongoing session would be violative of basic democratic values owing to the unessential deprivation of the member concerned and more importantly the constituency would remain unrepresented in the Assembly In its 90-page judgement the bench said Suffice it to observe that one year suspension is worse than expulsion disqualification or resignation insofar as the right of the constituency to be represented before the HouseAssembly is concerned The bench said that in absence of any express provision bestowing power in the Legislature to suspend its members beyond the term of ongoing session the inherent power of the Legislature can be invoked only to the extent necessary and for proper exercise of the functions of the House at the relevant point of timeThe apex court which referred to Rule 53 of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Rules that deals with power to order withdrawal of member said this rule not only speaks about the procedure to be adopted for passing the drastic order of withdrawal of a member but also about the substantive disciplinary or rationality of self-security measure to be taken in a graded manner The non-compliance of or deviation from the former procedure may be non-justiciable However in regard to the substantive disciplinary or the rationality of the self-security measure inflicted upon the erring member is open to judicial review on the touchstone of being unconstitutional grossly illegal and irrational or arbitrary the bench notedIt noted that if it is a case of grossly disorderly behaviour in the House the speakerchairman himself is free to take instantaneous decision to order withdrawal of the member from the meetings of Assembly during the remainder of the days meeting and if it is a case of repeat misconduct in the same session for the remainder of the sessionA priori if the resolution passed by the House was to provide for suspension beyond the period prescribed under the stated Rule it would be substantively illegal irrational and unconstitutional it saidThe bench said the suspension beyond the remainder period of the ongoing session would also impact the democratic setup as a whole by permitting the thin majority government coalition government of the day to manipulate the numbers of the Opposition party in the House in an undemocratic manner It said the Opposition will not be able to effectively participate in the discussion in the House owing to the constant fear of its members being suspended for longer periodThere would be no purposeful or meaningful debates but one in terrorem and as per the whims of the majority That would not be healthy for the democracy as a whole the bench saidIt observed that it is in public domain through print electronic and social media that members of Parliament or Assembly or Council of the State spend much of the time in a hostile atmosphere and Parliament and Legislative Assembly are becoming more and more intransigent placeIt said that for becoming world leaders and self-dependant or reliant quality of debates in the House ought to be of highest order and directed towards intrinsic Constitutional and native issues confronting the common manIn any case there can be no place for disorderly conduct in the House much less grossly disorderly it said adding Such conduct must be dealt with sternly for ensuring orderly functioning of the House But that action must be Constitutional legal rational and as per the procedure established by law The 12 suspended members were Sanjay Kute Ashish Shelar Abhimanyu Pawar Girish Mahajan Atul Bhatkhalkar Parag Alavani Harish Pimple Yogesh Sagar Jaikumar Rawal Narayan Kuche Ram Satpute and Bunty BhangdiaThey were suspended for one year on July 5 last year from the Assembly after the state government had accused them of misbehaving with presiding officer Bhaskar Jadhav in the Speakers chamber PTI ABA SA

New Delhi Nov 25 PTI The Special Investigation Team SIT on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the allegation of a larger conspiracy in the 2002 Gujarat riots has been blown out of proportion by claiming that several persons in the then state government right from the highest to the lowest were complicitThe SIT told a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar that they have examined everybody right from the then Gujarat Chief Minister to others and devoted a huge amount of time on all the issues raised in the complaint filed by Zakia Jafri who has alleged larger conspiracy during the riotsZakia Jafri the wife of slain Congress leader Ehsan Jafri who was killed at Gulberg Society in Ahmedabad on February 28 2002 during the violence has challenged the SITs clean chit to 64 people including Narendra Modi the then Gujarat chief minister during the riotsWhat I am trying to submit is that it is being blown out of proportion completely blown out of proportion by saying that everybody in the state government from the highest to the lowest everybody in the political class everybody in the state administration everybody in the police is complicit senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the SIT told the benchRohatgi told the bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar that there were allegations made about some glaring examples of state-sponsored eventsSee the impact of this That is why I have said this case has gone haywire he said adding What do you mean by state-sponsored Does it mean that people in the administration the political class have sponsored these riotsArguing that there was nothing to substantiate the allegation of a larger conspiracy he said that SIT had investigated all the aspects examined relevant materials and then filed a report before the trial courtThe SIT examined everybody from the chief minister downwards major people in the cabinet including the chief minister top police officials top civil administration officers all this was done It is not as if they SIT did not examine the chief minister or anybody else he said during the arguments which would continue on December 1The senior advocate said the allegation that there was undue delay in deployment of the Army during the violence in the state was not justifiedHe said Army was called the same day and deployed and this destroy the allegations of conspiracy whether by the political class the state government or the policeWhy did not the government do this why did not the government transfer this these are not meant to be criminality or conspiracy But yet this SIT devoted a huge amount of time on all these issues They did not leave a single issue by saying it is beyond our remit he saidDuring the hearing the bench asked Rohatgi whether the petitioner had participated in the trial which was going on before the trial courtHe said Zakia Jafri was examined as a prosecution witness during the trialThe bench told Rohatgi that if her evidence is available it can be placed on recordThe senior advocate also told the bench that 19 out of the 275 persons examined by the SIT were prosecution witnesses in the Gulberg caseRohatgi told the bench that during the arguments before the apex court Zakia Jafri has not pressed the issue regarding the complaint against the then chief ministerThe bench asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is appearing for Zakia Jafri about itAll matters which require further investigation I have read to your lordships Sibal said adding I have purposely not read any part of any allegation against the then CMHe said the petitioner was not asking for any further investigation on the meeting of February 27Rohatgi said the court may note that allegation against the then chief minister in the complaint or what was recorded in the closure report and accepted by the court below is not being assailedTo this Sibal said That is not being pressed for further investigation Tomorrow if there is some other evidence that comes up I dont know I have no idea That is the law of this country that if tomorrow any other fresh evidence comes up which is not available today nothing is ever closed forever See what happened to the Sikh riots Sibal saidSibal said he would give a written statement on behalf of the petitioner on thisZakia Jafris counsel had earlier argued that her complaint of 2006 was that there was a larger conspiracy where there was bureaucratic inaction police complicity hate speeches and unleashing of violence Ehsan Jafri the former MP was among the 68 people killed in the violence a day after the Godhra train incident On February 8 2012 the SIT had filed a closure report giving a clean chit to Modi now the Prime Minister and 63 others including senior government officials saying there was no prosecutable evidence against them Zakia Jafri had filed a petition in the apex court in 2018 challenging the Gujarat High Courts October 5 2017 order rejecting her plea against the SIT decision The high court in its October 2017 order had said the SIT probe was monitored by the Supreme Court However it partly allowed her petition as far as its demand for a further investigation was concerned saying she can approach an appropriate forum including the magistrates court a division bench of the high court or the Supreme Court seeking further investigation PTI ABA ABA RKS RKS

New Delhi Nov 23 PTI The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea challenging the change in land use of a plot where the new official residence of the vice president will come up as part of the ambitious Central Vista project in Lutyens DelhiA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar said that sufficient explanation has been offered by authorities concerned which justify the change in land use of the plotWe find no reason to examine the matter further and therefore put a quietus to the entire controversy by dismissing this petition the bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar said The Central Vista revamp announced in September 2019 envisages a new triangular Parliament building with a seating capacity for 900 to 1200 MPs that is to be constructed by August 2022 when the country will celebrate its 75th Independence Day The common Central Secretariat is to be built by 2024 under the project that covers a three-km stretch from Rashtrapati Bhavan to India Gate in the national capital The apex court was hearing a petition challenging the change in land use of plot number one from recreational area to residential PTI ABA ABA DV DV

New Delhi Oct 21 PTI The Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it recognises the role of non-profit and voluntary organizations in national development and genuine NGOs need not shy away from any regulatory compliance mandated under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act 2010In an affidavit filed in the apex court which is hearing a batch of petitions raising issues concerning the Foreign Contribution Regulation Amendment Act 2020 the government has said that there exists no right to seek foreign contribution without regulationIt said the right to form associations and the right to freedom of trade and profession cannot include the right to receive unbridled and unregulated foreign contributionsIt is also respectfully submitted that the answering respondent recognizes the role of non-profit organizations NGOs and voluntary organizations in national development it saidGenuine NGOs need not shy away from any regulatory compliance mandated under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act 2010 for quick and effective monitoring of the receipt and utilisation of foreign contribution for sake of transparency accountability so that the foreign contribution is not received and utilised for any activities detrimental to the sovereignty and integrity of the country public order and interests of the general public and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto the affidavit saidIt said the prohibition on the transfer of foreign contribution receipt of foreign contribution in the State Bank of India New Delhi main branch and obtaining Aadhaar number of the office bearers key functionaries and members would improve compliance mechanism enhance transparency and fix accountability in the receipt and utilisation of foreign contributionIt said the rights under Article 21 protection of life and personal liberty of the Constitution of the petitioners remain unaffected and untouched by the amendments and the right to life and liberty of a person cannot include the right to receive foreign contributions without due care and regulation as provided by the procedure established by lawWhile seeking dismissal of the pleas the affidavit also dealt with the issue raised by some of the petitioners regarding the requirements under the amendment Act that each license holder under FCRA has to open a bank account in a nominated branch of the State Bank of India at New DelhiIt said the concern of the petitioner about the physical access to the local bank account of its choice is unfounded and misleadingThe averments made by some petitioners stating that there are close to 50000 persons registered under FCRA is false and misleading and amounts to twisting of facts In fact a closer scrutiny of the documents attached from the FCRA website would reveal that out of close to 50000 persons registered under FCRA registration certificates of less than 23000 persons are active whereas registration of over 20600 non-compliant persons has been cancelled already it saidThe Centre further said that based on the existing procedure over 19000 accounts have already been opened at SBI New Delhis main branchWhile two of these petitions in the top court have challenged the amendments carried out in the Act one of them has sought stricter enforcement of the amended and other provisions of the lawA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar would hear the matter on October 28One of the pleas has sought a direction to the government not to grant any further extension to the NGOs to comply with specific provisions of the law including on opening of bank account at a specific branch of a nationalised bankIt has said that May 18 notification of the Ministry of Home Affairs had extended the date for compliance of specific provisions of the Act regarding the opening of account in the designated branch of State of Bank of India here from March 31 2021 to June 30 this year PTI ABA ABA RKS RKS

New Delhi Sep 28 PTI The Delhi Commission for Women DCW told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that it will ensure holistic rehabilitation and legal support to a 19-year-old woman who has alleged that she was sexually assaulted by her father when she was a minorThe commission told a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar that there is no specific policy in place for rehabilitation of rape and incest survivors in Delhi but the DCW on its own takes up rehabilitation of certain survivors who are in dire need for the sameIn an affidavit filed before the apex court which is hearing the woman plea for transfer of the case lodged on her complaint from Ambala to Delhi the DCW said rehabilitation provided by them to such survivors entails providing financial help access to education skill development and facilitating job opportunitiesThe bench also comprising justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar told the counsel appearing for the petitioner to interact with the officials of the commission in this regard and said it would hear the matter on WednesdayThe petitioners counsel told the bench that the accused has not been apprehended yet and he is sending threatening messages and calls to the womanThe bench said they can interact with the DCW officials and mention all these things so that they can take appropriate stepsThe top court observed that the first issue is of providing immediate comfort and security to the woman and the commission is willing to provide help to herThe woman in her petition drawn by advocate Akshita Goyal has claimed that her father had sexually assaulted her when she was a minor and as her mother had passed away in 2016 there is no one to look after her in the familyThe DCW affidavit said the woman had approached it on July 23 with a complaint of alleged sexual assault by her father which took place when she was a minor and a senior member of the commission interacted with her and held a detailed counsellingIt said a support team of the commission had visited the police station with the woman and later a zero FIR was lodged here and it was transferred to Ambala in view of jurisdictional issueA zero FIR can be filed in any police station and it is then forwarded to the concerned police station under whose jurisdiction the alleged offence has been committed for necessary actionThe commission is keen to facilitate the best possible opportunities for the applicant woman and ensure her holistic rehabilitation the DCW said in its affidavitIt said in all cases especially in sexual assault the commission strives to provide best possible counselling psychological support access to proper medical facilities as well as legal support to the survivorWhile there is no specific policy for rehabilitation of rape and incest survivors in place in the state of Delhi the commission on its own accord takes up rehabilitation of certain survivors who are in dire need for the same The rehabilitation provided by the commission thus far to survivors has entailed providing financial help access to education skill development and facilitating job opportunities it saidThe commission has said it has contacted the woman for a detailed interaction so that a plan can be chalked out for her rehabilitation as per her aspirationsIt said that based on her interest the commission can facilitate to place her in a shelter home and arrange for her further education and enrol her in probable skill development courses so that she can become self-independent and lead a normal lifeThe DCW said if the woman wishes to stay with her relatives or independently and want to pursue further education or get herself enrolled in skill development courses the commission shall ensure full support for her rehabilitationIt said so far as safety security and protection of the woman is concerned it comes within the ambit of the Delhi PoliceThe commission said if the case is transferred from Ambala to Delhi it would provide all legal assistance and possible support during investigation and trial in the caseThe affidavit said the DCW would also provide assistance to her in seeking compensation under the victim compensation scheme to meet out her basic needs which may help in her rehabilitationOn September 24 the apex court had asked the DCW to apprise what steps would it take to provide relief to the womanIt had also asked the Delhi Police to inform whether it has any objection in taking over the investigation in the caseIn her petition filed through advocate Abhinav Agrawal the woman has said that she had left her home on July 22 and went to one of her relatives house and the next day she had approached the DCWShe has sought a direction that upon transfer of the case to Delhi it be investigated as per the procedure prescribed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and also the standing order issued by Delhi Police for response and probe into cases of a sexual offenceIt has also sought a direction to the DCW to look after the protection and basic necessities of the woman as she fears for her safety PTI ABA SA

New Delhi Sep 22 PTI The government process has to abide by court directions the Supreme Court said on Wednesday while pulling up Kerala authorities for not deciding the proposal pertaining to premature release of two convicts who are serving life term and have been in jail for 28 years including remissionWhile expressing anguish that decision has not been taken by competent authority on the issue despite its earlier order the apex court ordered that the convicts who are serving life term in connection with a two-decade-old case of hooch tragedy which had claimed 31 lives be forthwith released on bailA bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar was told by the counsel appearing for Kerala that some more time was required to complete the processThe bench also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar said the convicts are in custody for over 28 years and the apex court had already granted time to the state to take decision in this regardWhen the states counsel argued that some more time was needed as it is a government process the bench said The government process has to abide by the directions of the court The bench which was hearing a plea filed by the wives of the two convicts seeking their release from jail referred to earlier orders passed in the matter and said that on September 6 it had given a clear direction that the decision be taken by the competent authority within two weeksThe petition filed through advocate Malini Poduval said that convicts Vinod Kumar and Manikantan have undergone total incarceration of over 28 years and nearly 30 years respectively including remissionThis is not the way government can function contrary to the directions given by the court There was purpose behind that direction Is it not It was adjourned earlier also the bench said during the hearingWe will direct their release on bail if you are not taking decision within the time given by the court You cannot come in our way That is our prerogative You may take your time to decide the proposal the bench told the states counselThe top court noted in its order that despite repeated opportunity given to the state to expedite the decision making process concerning the proposal for premature release of the convicts once again further time has been sought by the governmentIt said that while requesting for further time no satisfactory explanation has been given why the government was unable to take a final decision on the proposal within two weeks from September 6 as directed by the courtThe bench directed that the convicts be released on bail during the pendency of the petitionThey should be released forthwith on conditions as may be specified by the trial court and not later than 48 hours from passing of this order the bench said and posted the matter for hearing after six weeksIn its August 3 order passed in the matter the apex court had directed the state to place the proposal before the state advisory committee and said that the panel may take appropriate decision after considering all aspects of the matterLater in its September 6 order the apex court had noted As per the additional counter affidavit it appears that the committee has already recommended premature release of the husbands of the petitionersLet that be placed before the competent authority who in turn may take decision expeditiously and not later than two weeks from today and report compliance in that behalfThe petitioners have claimed in the plea that after completing 14 years of actual imprisonment the convicts have been giving representations to the prison advisory board for their premature release but the same were rejected without disclosing any reasons to themThe plea said both the accused were convicted along with others by the trial court and were awarded life imprisonment in the case which was registered in KollamIt said 31 people had lost their lives six had suffered blindness while over 500 had fallen sick due to illicit liquorThe plea said the apex court had in 2011 upheld the judgement delivered by the Kerala High Court which had sentenced the convicts for life in the caseIt has sought a declaration that action of the concerned authorities in not considering the case of these convicts for premature release despite fulfilling all statutory conditions is illegal and violative of Article 14 equality before law of the Constitution PTI ABA SA