PIL

A person from the field of animal husbandry has approached the Supreme Court to stop the “indiscriminate” use of Artificial Reproduction Techniques (ART) on livestock, avoiding the animals’ natural reproduction processes.

A plea has been filed in the Meghalaya High Court seeking directions from the government to define ‘minority’ & frame guidelines for their identification at the state level, in a spirit of the provision of Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India and the judgment of the apex court in TMA Pai case.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the central government, submitted: “This is contrary to the provisions already in place. Our society does not accept same-sex marriage.”

A petition has come before the Supreme Court assailing the non implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY), commonly known as the Ayushman Bharat health insurance scheme, by Delhi, Telangana, Odisha and West Bengal.

The Supreme Court today agreed to examine if religious places of all faiths can be reopened. The court has issued notice to the Centre, along with other states, made a party in the public interest petition filed, saying that religious places can be reopened with safety measures in place.

The Allahabad High Court has appealed to the public to wear masks and follow the rules of social distancing to avoid corona infection.

AN important PIL, which could have far-reaching implications on adoption rules, was placed before the Supreme Court in late August. It sought the removal of anomalies in the grounds for adoption and guardianship, to make them uniform for all citizens and also to make them gender and religion neutral.

A PIL has been filed before the Supreme Court, seeking removal of anomalies in the grounds of adoption and guardianship and making them uniform for all citizens. The plea says adoption laws should be gender neutral and religion neutral.

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea challenging the validity of part of the National Commission for Minority Education Institution Act, 2004 for failing to recognize minorities at the state level.

A divisional bench of the court, comprising Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan, while hearing the matter through video conferencing, stated: “This seems to be a motivated PIL against the ICAI’s chief.”