tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post4181207271870002554..comments2023-05-27T19:26:45.029+05:30Comments on Jai's blog: Article 371-D implicationsJai Gottimukkalahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-17011667478561499252014-07-20T19:19:54.687+05:302014-07-20T19:19:54.687+05:30Your link leads to an unrelated page.
I don't...Your link leads to an unrelated page.<br /><br />I don't understand the bike helmets context. Can you please provide the caselaw reference, thanks.<br /><br />"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"<br /><br />Looks correct to me. Having said this how does it Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-53953468450314925572014-07-14T09:59:35.506+05:302014-07-14T09:59:35.506+05:30t survive the court case no matter how long be it ...t survive the court case no matter how long be it continued.<br />Riders of the bicycles will also use the bicycle helmets <br />for safety. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.<br /><br />Here is my page; <a href="http://find.hamptonroads.com/user/2wkq2c5" rel="Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-31525515501016251692013-11-20T12:11:20.327+05:302013-11-20T12:11:20.327+05:30The complete judgment is now available.
http://mi...The complete judgment is now available.<br /><br />http://missiontelangana.com/ap-high-court-judgement-on-article-371d/<br />http://indiacurrentaffairs.org/high-court-judgement-on-article-371-d/<br /><br />Is article 3 a part of the basic structure? The honorable court tilted to this view opining "Article 3 in our view has empowered Parliament to regulate and preserve Federalism as enshrinedJai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-30890473377372461432013-11-15T18:24:30.821+05:302013-11-15T18:24:30.821+05:30I believe the question will be settled once the fu...I believe the question will be settled once the full text of the PV Krishnaiah case is available.<br /><br />"Some of them aver that both these articles have some connection wtih 7th schedule matters"<br /><br />Who? I have shown Jandhyala's claim to be wrong. Alternately anyone can check the various entries in the 3 lists & let me know the impacted entry number.<br /><br />&Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-52738339796833069382013-11-15T15:26:34.214+05:302013-11-15T15:26:34.214+05:30Mr.Jai, u have spoken a lot on Article 371(D) and ...Mr.Jai, u have spoken a lot on Article 371(D) and Article 371E. But other jurists are of a contradictory opinion to yours.Some of them aver that both these articles have some connection wtih 7th schedule matters and hence need a special majority to be amended. With this back ground I would like to know your views on the following:<br />- As the latest news reports suggest, the law ministry has Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14810057386835402007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-87325921312395226222013-11-15T13:53:19.177+05:302013-11-15T13:53:19.177+05:30Looks like the High Court reached similar conclusi...Looks like the High Court reached similar conclusions in PV Krishnaiah's PIL.<br /><br />http://missiontelangana.com/contentions-about-article-371d-are-absurd/Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-29171111953518073962013-11-11T15:53:31.736+05:302013-11-11T15:53:31.736+05:30The story on Bindu's statement is rather confu...The story on Bindu's statement is rather confusing. I guess he was speaking to the press after receiving a communique from the center.<br /><br />Lakshmana Rao's case refers to Hyderabad General Recruitment Rules issued by the Rajpramukh in 1955. While the court did not settle the question if the Rajpramukh's action was legal or not, it does show that the 1954 Bindu story was not the Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-74079891390103756192013-11-11T15:46:03.334+05:302013-11-11T15:46:03.334+05:30I agree *also* is inconsistent with the claim that...I agree *also* is inconsistent with the claim that Telanganites allegedly bemoaned their "loss".<br /><br />But the *only* interpretation does not explain another case that SKC is referring just after this.<br /><br />"In another development , on July 11, 1973, the Andhra Pradesh High Court gave another verdict that Mulki Rules would apply to initial recruitment and nor for Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-54381387960554128542013-11-10T14:35:51.279+05:302013-11-10T14:35:51.279+05:30Bindu's statement is on 1954 June18Bindu's statement is on 1954 June18Satyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-78465689092204083732013-11-10T14:34:50.641+05:302013-11-10T14:34:50.641+05:30>> people from outside who came to Telangana...>> people from outside who came to Telangana and settled there could *also* be Mulkis and not only those who were born and brought up in Telangana"<br /><br />Dont u see the keyword *also* is incorrect by the follow thru line.<br /> "As a result of this decision, the Telangana people claimed that they lost the benefit of the Mulki Rule. "<br /><br />How will Telangana pplSatyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-32616698414695370482013-11-09T12:42:23.110+05:302013-11-09T12:42:23.110+05:30Reposting after correcting a typo:
Satya, I tried...Reposting after correcting a typo:<br /><br />Satya, I tried hard but could not find the full text of this judgment anywhere.<br /><br />On SKC (page 75), I find:<br /><br />"The Andhra Pradesh High Court on February 16, 1973, declared that people from outside who came to Telangana and settled there could *also* be Mulkis and not only those who were born and brought up in Telangana"<br Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-72772784870229921632013-11-09T12:39:40.510+05:302013-11-09T12:39:40.510+05:30This comment has been removed by the author.Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-19177915245572337512013-11-09T09:38:19.662+05:302013-11-09T09:38:19.662+05:30Dear friends,
Mr. Suyash Verma runs the popular &...Dear friends,<br /><br />Mr. Suyash Verma runs the popular & exemplary Desi Kanoon web site. He shares his erudite views on several interesting (and important) legal matters.<br /><br />Please see www.desikanoon.co.in to benefit from his opinions.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />JaiJai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-30669026838820858752013-11-09T09:34:19.457+05:302013-11-09T09:34:19.457+05:30Thanks a lot.
I am pleased to receive an acclaime...Thanks a lot.<br /><br />I am pleased to receive an acclaimed legal expert at my blog.Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-23511609050257625622013-11-09T00:58:08.737+05:302013-11-09T00:58:08.737+05:30Very interesting read Sir. Keep up the good work. ...Very interesting read Sir. Keep up the good work. :)Suyash Vermahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04878990532251925522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-47991762741083036902013-11-08T20:19:05.630+05:302013-11-08T20:19:05.630+05:30Judgement given on 17th february 1973. Kondal rao ...Judgement given on 17th february 1973. Kondal rao vs state of Andhra Pradesh<br /><br />Satyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-81560576620544209132013-11-08T18:11:02.676+05:302013-11-08T18:11:02.676+05:30In fact I did not notice the missing "not&quo...In fact I did not notice the missing "not" :)<br /><br />Under article 74, the President has no right to reject cabinet advice. The best he can do is to return it *once only* for consideration. The advice becomes binding once it is forwarded by the cabinet a second time (with or without changes).<br /><br />I am not sure if the President can consult the state legislature between NL2 Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-80313578989959487092013-11-08T17:43:25.713+05:302013-11-08T17:43:25.713+05:30article 74 is when the bill goes to president from...article 74 is when the bill goes to president from cabinet. Here is what article 3 got exclusivity. The bill should be introduced by president. since there is no difference of opinion btwn President and cabinet in the states formed so far, it cannot be taken as a norm that cabinet had authority to do sosatyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-5469705580732037902013-11-08T17:23:32.975+05:302013-11-08T17:23:32.975+05:30oops sorry.. read the last para in my above comme...oops sorry.. read the last para in my above comment as "I am <b>not</b> taking the Ambedkar 'personal' views here. I am just taking his 'official' explanation for article 3 and its provisions"satyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-63397679386911727482013-11-08T16:42:41.999+05:302013-11-08T16:42:41.999+05:30There is no concept of non-local quota. Article 37...There is no concept of non-local quota. Article 371-D refers only to "preference or reservation".<br /><br />The presidential order similarly speaks of "x% of the posts to be filled by direct recruitment any time .... shall be reserved in favour of local candidates in relation to the local area in respect of such cadre".<br /><br />The number x is different for different Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-67540606509530746432013-11-08T16:24:45.281+05:302013-11-08T16:24:45.281+05:30"Between NL2 and NL3, the President should co..."Between NL2 and NL3, the President should consult the state legislature"<br /><br />This may be what you want. However I am not sure if it is permitted by article 74.<br /><br />In any case, this is not what Dr. Ambedkar in response to Prof. Shah.<br /><br />"I am taking the Ambedkar 'personal' views here. I am just taking his 'official' explanation for article 3 Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-49791830648116350642013-11-08T16:11:34.986+05:302013-11-08T16:11:34.986+05:30Will Seeamandra people be eligible for non-local q...Will Seeamandra people be eligible for non-local quota after bifurcation?Subbaraonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-44714434841790198402013-11-08T14:27:35.207+05:302013-11-08T14:27:35.207+05:30NL2: Cabinet forwards the decision to President
NL...<i>NL2: Cabinet forwards the decision to President<br />NL3: President accepts the decision </i><br /><br />Here is the difference. Between NL2 and NL3, the President should consult the state legislature. Then *only* the bill should be recommended by president, though it need not bear the opinion of legislature.<br /><br />>> Another point to be noted. Though Dr. Ambedkar headed the Satyanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-31670297805144556462013-11-08T13:59:42.262+05:302013-11-08T13:59:42.262+05:30"And the final twist is the after all these j..."And the final twist is the after all these judgements, the andhra pradesh high court has given a new definition of mulki in its judgement, terming those who are natives are not mulkis but only came from outside and lived in hyd state for 15 yrs."<br /><br />I am really skeptical about this. AFAIK, Mulki rules (both R2 & R3) were based on domicile irrespective of place of birth.<br Jai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8816095223506770563.post-75170499789312600242013-11-08T13:49:07.062+05:302013-11-08T13:49:07.062+05:30Section 2 repealed the Mulki rules throughout the ...Section 2 repealed the Mulki rules throughout the erstwhile Hyderabad state. Section 3 reestablished Mulki rules (R3) only for Telangana.<br /><br />Sections 2 & 3 were both struck down *only* insofar as it relates to Telangana.<br /><br />Therefore, section 2 survives in HK and Marathwada).<br /><br />Mulki rules (R2) were thus applicable for a very brief period in these areas. I do not knowJai Gottimukkalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17295146527743208423noreply@blogger.com