SUPREME COURT RULING ON CHILD CUSTODY BASED ON WELFARE, NOT PARENTAL RIGHTS
Maternal Aunt vs. Father of the Minor Child
Recently, the Supreme Court showed disapproval with the Madhya Pradesh High Court decision to grant custody of a 2.5 year old child to her father on the grounds of his status of Natural Guardian. SC mentioned child’s custody should be based on the child’s welfare. The case is challenged in Supreme court by the maternal aunt of the child after the High Court’s decision to grant custody to father who is on bail and also accused of dowry death.
Legal Provisions:
- Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (HMGA):
- Section 6: Defines the natural guardians of a Hindu minor, which includes the father and, after him, the mother. The act prioritises the father unless the child is below five years, in which case the mother has precedence.
- Section 13: The welfare of the minor is the paramount consideration, which means that even if the father is the natural guardian, the court may grant custody to the mother if it is in the child’s best interest.
Legal Framework:
- Best Interest Principle: Indian courts often interpret “welfare of the minor” as the best interest of the child, which can override the statutory preference for the father as the natural guardian.
- Judicial Precedents: Courts have, in several cases, awarded custody to the mother, emphasising the child’s welfare over strict legal guardianship norms.
|
SOURCE- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS EMPLOYMENT OF SC QUOTA BANK EMPLOYEES DESPITE CASTE DE-SCHEDULING
Nirmala & Ors. vs. Canara Bank & Anr., C.A. No.
Supreme Court ruled against the Canara bank show cause notice to employees appointed under reserved Scheduled Caste quota. The Apex Court ruled in favour of the employees and mentioned that appointment and admissions that have become final should not be disturbed, reaffirming the employees right under existing legal protections.
Legal Provisions:
- Constitution of India:
- Article 16(4): Allows the state to make provisions for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens that, in the opinion of the state, is not adequately represented in the services under the state.
- Article 15(4): Provides the state the power to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens.
- Article 46: Directs the state to promote the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections, particularly SC/STs.
Legal Framework:
- Reservation Policies: Govern the employment of SC/ST categories in public sector jobs, including PSUs.
- Service Rules and Regulations: Specific to individual PSUs and government bodies, which often include provisions for maintaining reservation rosters and resolving caste-based employment disputes.
|
SOURCE- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUPREME COURT EXAMINES VALIDITY OF ARBITRATOR APPOINTMENTS BY INTERESTED PARTIES
CENTRAL ORGANISATION FOR RAILWAY ELECTRIFICATION vs. M/S ECI SPIC SMO MCML (JV) A JOINT VENTURE COMPANY
The Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, began hearing arguments on whether a party ineligible to serve as an arbitrator can appoint one. The issue revolves around the fairness of arbitration panels curated unilaterally by Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs). The Court discussed the need for an impartial and independent arbitration process, with some justices and advocates suggesting that institutional arbitration, rather than panels controlled by one party, could address concerns about bias and ensure equality in the arbitration process. The hearing will continue with further arguments.
Legal Provisions:
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996:
- Section 7: Defines the arbitration agreement and its essential features, such as being in writing.
- Section 11: Details the appointment of arbitrators in case of disputes.
- Section 34: Provides grounds for setting aside an arbitral award, including if the arbitration agreement is found to be invalid.
Legal Framework:
- Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs): Often have standard contract templates that include arbitration clauses to resolve disputes.
- Judicial Precedents: Indian courts have consistently examined the validity and enforceability of arbitration clauses, especially in contracts involving PSUs, to ensure they do not contradict statutory or constitutional provisions.
|
SOURCE- SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ALSO READ- DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (27 AUGUST 2024)
