Friday 26 April 2013

Of campus democracy and academic excellence: Students of St. Stephen’s College


Of campus democracy and academic excellence: Students of St. Stephen’s College


Over the past one year Delhi University has been subjected to significant changes in the name of academic excellence, and many more changes are in the offing, like an un-thought-out introduction of the four-year undergraduate course. Teachers and students who have voiced concerns (and protested) have been harassed and not paid any heed to. One can witness a general shrinking of democratic space, and the space for dissent within the university. It is almost as if democratic decision making is an enemy of academic excellence, and thus needs to be curbed! A sharp contradiction between campus democracy and a vaguely defined academic excellence has come up recently in some issues pertaining to St. Stephen’s College. In this article, we – some students of the college would like to draw attention to the injuries inflicted on campus democracy, and the questions thrown up about the very meaning of academic excellence in the process.   
Since the beginning of the semester, some students had collectively voiced their dissatisfaction over the 10 pm curfew for female residents in college (men have no such curfew time). They had demanded that the curfew be lifted, as it is discriminatory, and attention be paid to making the campus safer on the whole. Opinions had been divided within the faculty as well as students on the issue – some felt that the curfew was not entirely unacceptable considering the insecurities regarding safety of women within the city. The debate took a decisive turn towards being silenced a couple of weeks back due to an atmosphere of fear and insecurity among students in college due to various threats by the administration.
In light of the opinion against curfew, a General Body Meeting was organized in college on 25th March to put forth the demand. The Principal came to the GBM, and behaved in an extremely high-handed and authoritarian manner, terming the issue of curfew as a ‘petty grievance’ contrived by a few mischief makers. He made highly sexist comments proclaiming that men and women were not equal – they were different, like apples and oranges, like eggs and stones, and had to be taken care of differently. He refused to recognize the students right to voice their demand, claiming that they were mere guests and that he could force everyone out of residence and keep the buildings empty if he so desired. A student pointed out that women’s curfew is a traditional patriarchal gesture, a question he ignored. Since then, the most vocal section of the students has been targeted with threats of disciplinary action on the slightest of pretexts. Students have been called to the Principal’s office individually, or in small groups, and threatened with suspension from residence if they were not happy with the rules, by him as well as the hostel wardens. The Principal has been trying to isolate the ‘troublemakers’ by questioning their academic inclination.
A month before the semester examinations, the students have been told that they would not be granted hostel facilities next semester automatically. They would have to go through an interview process, which would take place on 22nd and 23rd April. The Principal himself would be conducting those interviews. Grant of hostel facilities would be based on academic excellence, contribution to college activities, and attendance. A new form for reapplication to the hostel has been brought out, asking vague questions about students’ contribution to college and asking them to specify if they disagree with residence rules. This constant uncertainty, coupled with a policing of students through the hostel wardens has created a sense of insecurity among students merely weeks before the examination. This seriously questions the Principal’s commitment to academic excellence. In the light of his claim of being a champion of the same, his treatment of a demand made by Mathematics (Hons.) students in 2012 may be noted. They had asked for an optional course, and since they were more than ten in number, according to the university rule, the college had to provide this option. The college refused to do so, asking the students to pay extra for a teacher if they wanted the course, citing lack of funds. In the very same year the college has gone on an extravagant facelift spree for no reason, importing grass worth 4 lakhs for the lawns. Whither academic excellence?
We are deeply concerned by the attitude of the Principal in dealing with dissenting opinion among students. The principle underlying such authoritarian behavior is disturbing. He is treating the college as his personal property and refusing to accept and engage with the voice of students in deciding how the college should be run. An institution of learning is meaningful to a society only when it is organically linked to it. That naturally means that all participants in the institution, whether students, staff members, or karamcharis, regardless of their location in society, have a say in matters concerning it. That is the basic principle of democratic functioning of an institution and it is being blatantly violated in St. Stephen’s College today. The wielding of disproportionate power by the Principal is running parallel to the same by the Vice-Chancellors of Delhi University and Jamia Milia Islamia. Education in India awaits a rescue from the hands of such figures.
We shall end with a note on the meaning of academic excellence. We believe that academic activity and theoretical debates cannot be disconnected from larger social debates and changes. Our classroom discussions, of patriarchy, equality, and democracy, stand in clear contradiction with the views expressed by the Principals and his supporters in the college administration. We believe academic activity is fulfilling when it is practiced in engagement with struggles in society and is integral to the process of dialogue and development. The snuffing out of the latter is not compatible with academic excellence. The kind of distortion of the meaning of academic excellence that is happening in the college and in the University as a whole, calls for a concerted challenge by all democratic and progressive sections of society.

This is a guest post by some STUDENTS OF ST. STEPHEN’S COLLEGE, Delhi

LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION-2013


LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION-2013


Thursday 25 April 2013

Law/Legal Internship Contact Details


Law/Legal Internship Contact Details
-
IMPORTANT: Please do NOT copy paste all the email IDs and send your internship application to everyone mentioned here. Your internship application will SURELY end as trash.
Before applying do your research according to your keen interest.
NGOs, Research Organizations, Etc.
1.      Transparency International India, New Delhi- tiindia.newdelhi@gmail.com
2.      Consumer Unity Trust Society, Jaipur- hrd@cuts.org
3.      Centre for Legislative Research and Advocacy, Delhi- info@clraindia.org (Vinod Bhanu)
4.      India Vision Foundation, NGO, Delhi- kritya.pandey@yahoo.com
5.      Action Aid India, Kolkata- Surajit.Neogi@actionaid.org
6.      Yuva Unstoppable, Ahemedabad- rinkal@yuvaunstoppable.org
7.      CARPED-Centre For Action Research and People’s Development, Hyderabad- idimam@gmail.com(M.Subash Chandra)
8.      Common Wealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Delhi  amutha@humanrightsinitiative.org
9.      CHRI, Kolkata: madhurima@humanrightsinitiative.org
10.  Greenpeace, Bangalore: rachita.taneja@greenpeace.org
11.  Centre for Disability Studies, NALSAR, Hyderabad: cdspadma@gmail.com
12.  Navjyoti India Foundation, Gurgaon: admin@navjyoti.org.in
13.  Majlis, Mumbai: majlislaw@gmail.com, majlislegal@gmail.com
14.  CRY, Mumbai- rahat.hazrati@crymail.org (Rahat Hazrati)


Government Organizations
1.      Law Commission
2.      Delhi Legal Service Authority- shabnam.zabi07@gmail.com
3.      National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, Delhi- ncpcr.india@gmail.com (VP Singh)
4.      Central Information Commission, Delhi- rtimonitoring@gmail.com (Ishani Nayyar)
5.      NHRC, New Delhi- us_trg_nhrc@yahoo.in, Dalbir Rawat
6.      Punjab State Human Rights Commission (PSHRC): pshrc.chd@gmail.com
7.      Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission: uphrc2010@gmail.com

Lawyers
1.      Jayant Bhushan- jayantbhushan@rediffmail.com
2.      Amarjeet Singh Chandhiok- achandhiok@gmail.com (Radhakrishnan)
3.      Vrinda Grover, Delhi- vrindagrover@gmail.com
4.      K.T.S. Tulsi- ktstulsi@hotmail.com
5.      Rajan Narain: rajannarain@gmail.com
6.      Tamal Kanti Mukherjee, Kolkata (a renowned district court lawyer)- +91 – 9830042715
7.      Protik Prokash Banerji- protik.1969@gmail.com
8.      C.S. Vaidyanathan (Senior Advocate) , Supreme Court: csvaidyanathan@yahoo.com
9.      Rajan Narain: rajan.internship@gmail.com
10.  Satish Tamta, Criminal Lawyer, Delhi: tamtasatish@gmail.com

Companies
1.      ALMT
2.      Legal League Consulting, New Delhi- bithika@legalleague.co.in (Bithika Anand)
3.      Copyright Integrity International, Bangalore- roshan.gk@copyrightintegrityrity.com (Roshan Gopalakrishnan)
4.      FICCI (IPR Division), Delhi- ficcihrd@ficci.com; sheetal.chopra@ficci.com
5.      Lexis Nexis: tanvi.rastogi@lexisnexis.com

LPOs
1.      Pangea3- pangea3@indianinternships.com
2.      SDD Global, Mysore- vidyad@sddglobal.com (Vidya Devaiah, Manager)

Law Firms
(Delhi, Noida, NCR region, Mumbai, Pune)
1.      Enviro Legal Defence Firm (ELDF), Noida- admin@eldfindia.com; sonali@eldfindia.com
2.      Luthra and Luthra, Delhi- CRodrigues@luthra.com (Candice Rodrigues)
3.      JSA, Gurgaon- anjum@jsalaw.com
4.      Anand & Anand, Noida- sangeeta@anandandanand.com (Sangeeta , HR)
5.      FML, Noida- nivedita.dhar@foxmandallittile.com
6.      Bhasin & Co, New Delhi- lbhasin@gmail.com
7.      DH Law Associates- dhlaw@vsnl.com
8.      Ranjan & Co., Delhi- ranjan_co76@rediffmail.com  (Saud Khan)
9.      Pinnacle Legal LLP, Chandigarh- prakriti@pinnaclelegal.in (Mrs.Prakriti Nanda)
10.  Khaitan and Co., Delhi- hr.delhi@khaitanco.com (Mr. Vivek Tripathi)
11.  Vaish Associates, New Delhi- vasudevan@vaishlaw.com (Vasudevan Nair)
12.  Gopakumar Nair Associates- gopanair@gnaipr.net; gnaipr@vsnl.net
13.  K & S Partners,Gurgaon- ghose@knspartners.com
14.  Rajan Narain/Global Legal Associates- rajan.internship@gmail.com
15.  Suri & Co., New Delhi- rohit.aggarwal@surico.in; info@surico.in
16.  Singhania & Parnters, Noida- sandeep.peters@singhania.co.in
17.  Dua Associates, Delhi- cardoza@duaassociates.com (Catherine Cardoza)
18.  BSK Legal, Delhi- Sanjaykchadha@bsklegal.org
19.  Majmudar & Partners- kjangalwala@majmudarindia.com
20.  PXV Law Partners- shilpi.rajpal@pxvlaw.com
21.  Kaden Boriss- ssk@kadenboriss.com
22.  AZB, Mumbai aditya.mehta@azbpartners.com;purnima.thacker@azbpartners.com
23.  DSK Legal, Mumbai- contactus@dsklegal.com
24.  Kochhar and Co., Mumbai- malti@mumbai.kochhar.com;legal@mumbai.kochhar.com
25.  Nishith Desai Associates, Mumbai- gowree@nishithdesai.com;nda@nishithdesai.com, internship@nishithdesai.com
26.  Krishna and Saurastri, Mumbai- info@krishnaandsaurastri.com;krismark@vsnl.net
27.  Bharucha & Partners, Mumbai- beena.tailor@bharucha.in (Beena Tailor)
28.  Rajani Associates, Mumbai- prem@rajaniassociates.net ; contactus@rajaniassociates.net
29.  Vaish Law Associates, Mumbai- bomi@vaishlaw.com; mumbai@vaishlaw.com
30.  Little and Company,Mumbai- G.pal@littlecompany.com
31.  Khaitan and Co., Mumbai- vinay@khaitanco.com; bejoy@khaitanco.com
32.  Singhania & Partners, Mumbai- mum@singhania.in (Mr. Suneet Tyagi)
33.  Gandhi and Associates, Mumbai- mitalee@gandhiassociates.com (Mr. Vishal Gandhi)
34.  Krishan and Saurastri Associates, Mumbai- anshu@krishnaandsaurastri.com (Anshu Srivastava)
35.  Crawford Bayley & Co, Mumbai- sanjay.asher@crawfordbayley.com (Sanjay Asher)
36.  ARA Law, Mumbai- mumbai@aralaw.com
37.  Advani and Co., Mumbai- hiroo.advani@advaniandco.com
38.  Kale and Shinde Associates, Pune- info@kaleandshinde.com
39.  Oasis Counsel and Advisory, Mumbai- hmj@oasisadvisory.com
40.  Solomon & Company Advocates and Solicitors, Mumbai: solomonco@slmnco.in (Blaise Cutinho)



A few more things:
1.      Some email IDs might be wrong or old. Sorry for that.
2.      Keep visiting this post for updates, additions, changes etc.
3.      In case you want to share a related document etc., please send that to tobelawyers1@gmail.com

Thanks a lot for your time and effort. We hope this list grows and that applying for internships is no longer a pain for law students in India.

JUDICIAL REVIEW ON ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION IN INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM By Deepanshu Gupta



JUDICIAL REVIEW ON ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION IN INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM
By Deepanshu Gupta

The doctrine of judicial review has been originated and developed by the American Supreme Court, although there is no express provision in the American Constitution for the judicial review. In Marbury v. Madison,the Supreme Court made it clear that it had the power of judicial review. Chief Justice George Marshall said, “Certainly all those who have framed the written Constitution contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nations, and consequently, the theory of every such Government must be that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the Constitution is void”.
There is supremacy of Constitution in U.S.A. and, therefore, in case of conflict between the Constitution and the Acts passed by the legislature, the Courts follow the Constitution and declare the acts to be unconstitutional and, therefore, void. The Courts declare void the acts of the legislature and the executive, if they are found in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.

A. Meaning
Judicial review is a great weapon in the hands of judges. It comprises the power of a court to hold unconstitutional and unenforceable any law or order based upon such law or any other action by a public authority which is inconsistent or in conflict with the basic law of the land.
Broadly speaking, judicial review in India deals with three aspects:
(i)         judicial review of legislative action;
(ii)        judicial review of judicial decision; and
(iii)       judicial review of administrative action.
It is necessary to distinguish between ‘judicial review’ and ‘judicial control’. The term judicial review has a restrictive connotation as compared to the term judicial control. Judicial review is ‘supervisory’, rather than ‘corrective’, in nature. Judicial review is denoted by the writ system which functions in India under Arts. 32 and 226 of the Constitution. Judicial control, on the other hand, is a broader term. It denotes a much broader concept and includes judicial review within itself. Judicial control comprises of all methods through which a person can seek relief against the Administration through the medium of the courts, such as, appeal, writs, declaration, injunction, damages statutory remedies against the Administration.

B. Object
The underlying object of judicial review is to ensure that the authority does not abuse its power and the individual receives just and fair treatment and not to ensure that the authority reaches a conclusion which is correct in the eye of law.
As observed by the Supreme Court in Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, the Constitution has created an independent judiciary which is vested with the power of judicial review to determine the legality of administrative action and the validity of legislation. It is the solemn duty of the judiciary under the Constitution to keep different organs of the State within the limits of the power conferred upon them by the Constitution by exercising power of judicial review as sentinel on the quo vive. Thus, judicial review aims to protect citizens from abuse or misuse of power by any branch of the state.

C. Judicial Review, Appeal and Revision
It should be remembered that the object and scope of judicial review of administrative action is different from that of appeal. The object of judicial review of administrative action by the ordinary courts is to keep the administrative authorities within the bounds of their powers under the law. Appeal, on the other hand, means that the superior administrative tribunal or court to whom appeal lies under the law, has the power to reconsider the decision of the inferior tribunal on the merits. Appeal, however, is a creature of statue and there is no right of appeal unless there is a specific statutory provision creating that right.
The power of revision is usually placed at the hands of the highest authority, e.g., the State Government, to correct any illegality or irregularity in the proceedings before the inferior authorities. There are: (a) Sometimes the statue expressly states that the power of revision may be exercised suo motu as well as on the application of the party aggrieved; (b) Sometimes the statue only authorizes the superior authority to use his power or revision suo motu or of his own motion, e.g., original s. 33 of the Income-tax Act, 1922. In such a case the party aggrieved has no right to relief and the revisional authority has no duty to perform, on the application of such party; (c) Difficulty of interpretation arises where neither the words ‘suo motu’, nor ‘on application’ are used by the statue.

D. Nature and Scope
Judicial review of administrative action is perhaps the most important development in the field of public law in the second half of this century. In India, the doctrine of judicial review is the basic feature of Indian Constitution. Judicial review is the most potent weapon in the hands of the judiciary for the maintenance of the rule of law. Judicial review is the touchstone of the Constitution. The Supreme Court and High Courts are the ultimate interpreters of the Constitution. It is, therefore, their duty to find out the extent and limits of the power of coordinate branches, viz. executive and legislature and to see that they do not transgress their limits. This is indeed a delicate task assigned to the judiciary by the Constitution. Judicial review is thus the touchstone and essence of the rule of law.
The power of judicial review is an integral part of Indian Constitutional system and without it, there will be no government laws and the rule of law would become a teasing illusion and a promise of unreality. The judicial review, therefore, is a basic and essential feature of the Constitution and it cannot be abrogated without affecting the basic structure of the Constitution. In judicial review, the court is not concerned with the merits or correctness of the decision, but with the manner in which the decision is taken or order is made. A court of law is not exercising appellate power and it cannot substitute its opinion for the opinion of the authority deciding the matter.
It is a cardinal principle of Indian Constitution that no one howsoever highly placed and no authority lofty can claim to be the sole judge of its power under the Constitution. The rule of law requires that the exercise power by the legislature or buy the judiciary or by the government or by any other authority must be conditioned by the Constitution. Judicial review is thus the touchstone and repository of the supreme law of the land.In recent times, judicial review of administrative action has become extensive and expansive. The traditional limitations have vanished and the sphere of judicial scrutiny is being expanded. Under the old theory, the courts used to exercise power only in cases of absence or excess or abuse of power. As the State activities have become pervasive and giant public corporations have come in existence, the stake of public exchequer justifies larger public audit and judicial control.
The scope of judicial review in India is not a wide as in USA. The American Supreme Court can declare any law unconstitutional on the ground of its not being in “due process of law”, but the Indian Supreme Court has no such power. In India, outside the limitation imposed on the legislative powers, Parliament and State legislature are supreme in their respective legislative fields and the Court has no authority to question the wisdom or policy of the law duly made by the appropriate legislature. Another reason is because the Indian Supreme Court has consistently refused to declare legislative enactments invalid on the ground that they violate the natural, social or political rights of citizens, unless it could be shown that such injustice was expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

E. Justiciability
Judicial review must be distinguished from justiciability. The two concepts are nor synonymous. The power of judicial review goes to the authority of the court and can be exercised by the court in appropriate cases. Justiciability is not a legal concept with fixes contents, nor is it susceptible of scientific verification. There is not and there cannot be a uniform rule regarding scope and reach of judicial review applicable to all cases. It varies from case to case depending upon subject-matter, nature of right and other relevant factors.
The power of judicial review relates to the jurisidcition of the court whereas justiciablity is hedged by self-imposed judicial restraint. A court exercising judicial review may refrain to exercise its power if it finds that the controversy raised before it is not based on judicially discoverable and manageable standards. Moreover, the area of justicibiality can be reduced or curtailed. Even when, exercise of power is bad, the court in its discretion decline to grant relief considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

F. Limitations
Judicial review has certain inherent limitations. It is suited more for adjudication of disputes than for performing administrative functions. It is for the executive to administer the law and the function of the judiciary is to ensure that the Government carries out its duty in accordance with the provision of the Constitution. Though the court is not expected to act as a court of appeal, nevertheless, it can examine whether the “decision-making process” was reasonable, rational, not arbitrary or not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The parameters of judicial review must be clearly defined and never exceeded. If the authority has faultered in its wisdom, the court cannot act as super auditor.
Unless the order passed by an administrative authority is unlawful or unconstitutional, power of judicial review cannot be exercised. An order of administration may be right or wrong. It is the administrator’s right to trial and error and so long as it is bonafide and within the limits of the authority, no interference is called for. In short, power of judicial review is supervisory in nature. Unless this restriction is observed, the court, under the guise of preventing abuse of power by the administrative authority, will itself be guilty of usurping power.

G. Conclusion
It is fundamental principle of law that every power must be exercised within the four corners of law and within the legal limits. Exercise of administrative power is not an exception to that basic rule. The doctrines by which those limits are ascertained and enforced form the very marrow of administrative law. Unfettered discretion cannot exist where the rule of law reigns. Again, all power is capable of abuse, and that the power to prevent the abuse is the acid test of effective judicial review. Under the traditional theory, courts of law used to control existence and extend of prerogative power but not the manner of exercise thereof. That position was, however, considerably modified after the decision in Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for Civil Service, wherein it was emphasized that the reviewability of discretionary power must depend upon the subject-matter and not upon its source. The extent and degree of judicial review and justifiable area may vary from case to case.
“All power is, in Madison’s Phrase ‘of an encroaching nature’. Judicial Power is not immune against this human weakness. It also must be on guard against encroaching beyond its proper bounds, and not the less so since the only restraint upon it is self restraint.”