Supreme Court on Jaipur Royal Family: The Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Rajasthan government on the petition of Jaipur royal family. In the ongoing dispute over the historic Town Hall (Old Assembly) of Jaipur, the apex court has issued a notice to the state government on the petition of Rajmata Padmini Devi and other petitioners. A bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Augustin George Christ in the Supreme Court told the Rajasthan government that no action will be taken forward as long as the matter is pending. The matter will now be heard after two months.
Virat Kohli stuck in new trouble: Before the IPL final match, big police action, FIR filed, FIR, know the whole matter at the restaurant
In fact, in the ongoing dispute over the historic Town Hall (Old Assembly) of Jaipur, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the claims of the royal family, considering it as a government property. The order of the High Court has been challenged in the Supreme Court by Padmini Devi, Dia Kumari and Padmanabh Singh, members of the royal family. The same case was heard on June 2 (Monday).
G7 Summit: PM Modi will not attend the G7 conference, this will be the first time in 6 years, is there any reason?
Senior Advocate Harish Salve, counsel for the petitioners, argued that the case was filled with legal complications. He said that three important issues in it are related to the privilege of former rulers and princely states in Articles 362 and 363 of the Constitution. These are different types of contracts and you know the history of these states. This is a treaty in which the Sangh was not even a side, it was between the rulers of Jaipur and Bikaner etc.
Corona’s ‘Gadar’ continues in India: 6 killed in 24 hours, 18 -year -old pregnant also broke down; Active case beyond 4 thousand, then remember these five guidelines, will be safe
‘This is how the whole of Jaipur will be yours’
On this, the Supreme Court said that you do this among themselves, without making the Union of India a side? How do you merge? Then the whole Jaipur will be yours. In this way, every ruler of Rajasthan will claim all government properties! Then these princely states will say that all the properties are theirs. The court said that if you say that the Union of India was not a party to this contract, then Article 363 will not be applicable.
Kangana Ranaut came out in support of Sharmishtha Panoli, said- release immediately, do not make Bengal North Korea
Senior advocate Salve said that this is not my argument, the bar will not be applicable under Article 363. The court said that if there is no restriction, everyone will file a case. Anyway, we are not discussing the validity of the case i.e. merit. We are only worried about this issue you have raised. Perhaps even half of Jaipur will be yours in these 4 cases. Well, we will issue notice and we have to hear the other side too.
Mehbooba Mufti walked a big bet, emphasized the return of Kashmiri Pandits in the valley, after 5 years, I met Jammu and Kashmir LG
State government sought deferment
The parties of the royal family Salve said that we want the status quo. The state counsel has sought 6 weeks of deferment to respond and argued that no interim order should be passed. The court issued a notice which has been accepted by the state lawyer. Then the court said that the state will respect the pending of SLP in this case and will not be included in the issue.
Saudi Arabia stopped two and a half million Muslims from going to the holy city of Mecca, why did it take such a decision during Haj, know the big reason behind this
What is the whole matter?
In fact, in 1949, some assets including Town Hall were given for government use under the agreement signed between Maharaja Sawai Mansingh II and the Government of India. The royal family objected after the Gehlot government’s decision to build a museum in 2022. From 2014 to 2022, no solution was found despite several notices and complaints. The royal family filed a lawsuit in the civil court demanding possession, ban and compensation. The state government demanded dismissal of the case, citing Article 363, which was rejected by the trial court. But the High Court reversed the trial court’s decision, saying that such agreements do not have the jurisdiction of civil courts, although it admitted that the property should be used only for government work under the agreement.
India Bullet Train Video: Picture of India’s first bullet train from Japan, trial starts, will be able to travel from this day
Supreme Court will investigate
The royal family has challenged the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court, arguing that the interpretation of Article 363 should be limited and it cannot cancel their constitutional rights (Article 14, 21, 300A), especially after the 26th Constitutional Amendment of 1971, when they are considered general citizens by abolishing the recognition of the rulers. And whether the rights of property of the royal family have been violated.
The romantic video of the couple who went to honeymoon viral, people said on watching- ‘150 rupees…’, watch the video
Follow the lalluram.com mp channel on whatsapphttps: //whatsapp.com/channel/0029va6fzuulsmbenxua9j0m
