Madras HC refuses to order release of Nalini, Ravichandran
The Hindu
The Bench headed by Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari says it lacks power conferred on the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution
The Madras High Court on Friday dismissed writ petitions filed by S Nalini and R.P. Ravichandran, life convicts in former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, to release them forthwith.
Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala held the High Court could not issue such a direction by exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The judges also pointed out that the Supreme Court had recently ordered the release of co-convict A.G. Perarivalan by exercising its special power under Article 142 of the Constitution.
Such power, conferred on the Supreme Court to issue any direction in order to do complete justice in a matter pending before it, had not been provided to the High Courts, the Bench said.
In her plea, Nalini had sought for a direction to the State Government to release her forthwith without waiting for the Governor to sign a recommendation made by the State Cabinet in September 2018 to release all seven convicts involved in the crime.
“Writing, in general, is a very solitary process,” says Yauvanika Chopra, Associate Director at The New India Foundation (NIF), which, earlier this year, announced the 12th edition of its NIF Book Fellowships for research and scholarship about Indian history after Independence. While authors, in general, are built for it, it can still get very lonely, says Chopra, pointing out that the fellowship’s community support is as valuable as the monetary benefits it offers. “There is a solid community of NIF fellows, trustees, language experts, jury members, all of whom are incredibly competent,” she says. “They really help make authors feel supported from manuscript to publication, so you never feel like you’re struggling through isolation.”
Several principals of government and private schools in Delhi on Tuesday said the Directorate of Education (DoE) circular from a day earlier, directing schools to conduct classes in ‘hybrid’ mode, had caused confusion regarding day-to-day operations as they did not know how many students would return to school from Wednesday and how would teachers instruct in two modes — online and in person — at once. The DoE circular on Monday had also stated that the option to “exercise online mode of education, wherever available, shall vest with the students and their guardians”. Several schoolteachers also expressed confusion regarding the DoE order. A government schoolteacher said he was unsure of how to cope with the resumption of physical classes, given that the order directing government offices to ensure that 50% of the employees work from home is still in place. On Monday, the Commission for Air Quality Management in the National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas (CAQM) had, on the orders of the Supreme Court, directed schools in Delhi-NCR to shift classes to the hybrid mode, following which the DoE had issued the circular. The court had urged the Centre’s pollution watchdog to consider restarting physical classes due to many students missing out on the mid-day meals and lacking the necessary means to attend classes online. The CAQM had, on November 20, asked schools in Delhi-NCR to shift to the online mode of teaching.