[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2021 (4) CTC 1 ; subramanian k vs state through inspector of police vigilance and anti corruption tirunelveli ( FB ) : person holding office which authorizes requires him to perform any public duty is public servant within meaning of act[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2021 (4) CTC 241 ( FB) : narayanan MV vs periyadan narayanan nair : single judge cannot doubt correctness of division bench decision[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2015 (6) CTC 22 : Anantha murugan SM vs chairman bar council of india : persons who have been dismissed or removed from service or left services consequent to departmental in – house proceedings are not eligible for enrolment as advocates[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2015 (2) SCC 553 : vinayak narayan deosthali vs CBI : Patent illegality cannot be defended in the name of practice or direction of higher authorities while deciding cases relating to corruption[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2012(6) CTC 841 : mahender gayal vs kadamba international : section 201 CRPC 1973 applicable only during pre – cognizable stage and not applicable during post – cognizance
[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2021 (4) CTC 1 ; subramanian k vs state through inspector of police vigilance and anti corruption tirunelveli ( FB ) : person holding office which authorizes requires him to perform any public duty is public servant within meaning of act
[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2021 (4) CTC 241 ( FB) : narayanan MV vs periyadan narayanan nair : single judge cannot doubt correctness of division bench decision
[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2015 (6) CTC 22 : Anantha murugan SM vs chairman bar council of india : persons who have been dismissed or removed from service or left services consequent to departmental in – house proceedings are not eligible for enrolment as advocates
[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2015 (2) SCC 553 : vinayak narayan deosthali vs CBI : Patent illegality cannot be defended in the name of practice or direction of higher authorities while deciding cases relating to corruption
[05/08, 10:45] Vinothpandian: 2012(6) CTC 841 : mahender gayal vs kadamba international : section 201 CRPC 1973 applicable only during pre – cognizable stage and not applicable during post – cognizance
![[3/18, 12:07] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: _Among the 124 names recommended for appointment as judges by high court collegiums which are under consideration with the Union government and the Supreme Court Collegium, only four are from the Scheduled Castes and only three are from the Scheduled Tribes._ https://theleaflet.in/only-17-sc-9-st-judges-among-569-hc-appointments-since-2018/ [3/24, 23:46] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: _Former Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising and senior advocate Mohan V. Katarki discuss the legal implications of Rahul Gandhi’s conviction and disqualification from Lok Sabha._ https://youtu.be/tBz6hMUD4Y8 [3/24, 23:52] Inthira Jaising Senior Advt Sc: _If the person concerned ceases to be a legislator without an opportunity to bring their matter to appeal, then it is not just a travesty of justice for the legislator concerned, but is also dangerous to democracy._ https://theleaflet.in/has-rahul-gandhi-ceased-to-be-an-mp-after-his-conviction-an-explainer/](https://sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
