Scroll Text

........ VERIFICATION OF MEMBERSHIP FOR RECOGNITION OF SERVICE ASSOCIATIONS IN GDS CADRE HAS BEEN STARTED FROM 22-06-2017.......ALL GDS COMRADES ARE REQUESTED TO FRANCHISE THEIR OPTION IN FAVOUR OF AIPEU GDS .......WITH ALL YOUR SUPPORT, COOPERATION & ENCOURAGEMENT IT WILL STANDS No.1 RECOGNIZED UNION....GIVE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO AIPEU GDS TO SERVE THE GDS BETTER & MUCH MORE BETTER....... .......

scroll text 2

......... CONGRATULATIONS TO THE SELECTED CANDIDATES FOR THE POSTS OF GDS .. VISIT indiapost.gov.in for Notifications ............. NEXT HEARING OF THE COURT CASE IN PR. CAT, DELHI IS ON ... 27th August 2017............

MESSAGE FROM CHQ

Dear Comrade newly elected Divisional / Branch Secretaries of AIPEU-GDS -- PLEASE SEND YOUR POSTAL ADDRESS WITH PIN CODE, MOBILE NUMBER, E-MAIL ID THROUGH SMS TO ..09849466595.. OR BY E-MAIL TO >aipeugdsnfpe@gmail.com< IMMEDIATELY................... CRUSADER TO GRAMIN DAK SEVAKS (2nd Edition -2016) is ready and can place indent to AIPEU GrC (CHQ), NEW DELHI-8....... One copy Rs.225/- (560 pages) ..... Send e-MO for Rs.250/- to receive one copy of the Book by Regd. Book Paket..........

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Hartal can never be unconstitutional: Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court refused on Friday to entertain a PIL that alleged that political organisations were resorting to hartals to hoodwink repeated judicial pronouncements banning strike and bandh calls, which paralysed normal life.
A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said, "Hartals can never be unconstitutional. Right to protest is a valuable constitutional right. How can we say hartals are unconstitutional."

Having failed to convince the bench to entertain the PIL, the petitioner decided to withdraw the plea.

Courts have ruled on strike, bandh and hartal calls given by political outfits for two decades now. The Kerala high court in Bharat Kumar case in 1997 had said, "When properly understood, the calling of a bandh entails the restriction of free movement of the citizen and his right to carry on his avocation and if the legislature does not make any law either prohibiting it or curtailing it or regulating it, we think that it is the duty of the court to step in to protect the rights of the citizen so as to ensure that the freedom....."  SC bench headed by then Chief Justice J S Verma had upheld this order.

 //copy//- POTOOLS