SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(SC) 1243

N. V. RAMANA, SURYA KANT, HIMA KOHLI
Anun Dhawan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ashima Mandla, Mandakini Singh, Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Ibad Mushtaq, Syed Mohd. Ahmad
For the Respondents: Raj Bahadur Yadav, Madhvi Divan, Gurmeet Singh Makker, R. Bala, Chinmayee Chandra, Gaurav Agrawal, Tapesh Kumar Singh, Aditya Pratap Singh, L. Bhaswati Singh, Aditya Narayan Das, Arun R. Pednekar, Mukti Chowdhary, Debojit Borkakati, Vivek Sonker, Ranjan Mukherjee, Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Anupama Ngangom, Karun Sharma, Sumeer Sodhi, Dhruv Wadhwa, Abhimanyu Tewari, Eliza Bar, Shibashish Misra, Ashish Kumar, Sandeep Kumar Jha, Pranav Sachdeva, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Sweena Nair, P. Mohith Rao, V.N. Raghupathy, M. Shoeb Alam, Avijit Mani Tripathi, T.K. Nayar, Shaurya Sahay, Santosh Kumar, Raghvendra Kumar, Anand Dubey, Narendra Kumar, Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Manish Kumar, Abhinav Singh, Anil Grover, Noopur Singhal, Rahul Khurana, Satish Kumar, Sanjay Kumar Visen, Bhanwar Jadon, Babita Mishra, Uttara Babbar, Astha Sharma, Garima Prashad, Tanmaya Agarwal, Wrick Chatterjee, Parth Yadav, Akshay Chowdhary, Rahul Chitnis, Sachin Patil, Aaditya A. Pande, Geo Joseph, G. Prakash, Priyanka Prakash, Beena Prakash, Suhaan Mukerji, Vishal Prasad, Nikhil Parikshith, Abhishek Manchanda, Mukul Singh, Sandeep Sharma, Sunny Choudhary, Abhinav Mukerji, Pratishtha Vij, Bihu Sharma, Akshay C. Shrivastava, K.V. Jagdishvaran, G. Indira, N.P. Haibila, G.N. Reddy, Aravindh S., C. Rubavathi, Chandra Prakash, Vivek Singh, C.P. Rajwar, K. Enatoli Sema, Amit Kumar Singh, Chubalemla Chang, M. Yogesh Kanna, B.V. Balaram Das, Shuvodeep Roy, Kabir Shankar Bose, Ishaan Borthakur, Rajiv Nanda, Satish Pandey, Deepanwita Priyanka, Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Siddhesh Kotwal, Pragya, Joseph Aristotle S., Preeti Singh, Ripul Swati Kumari, Mahfooz A. Nazki, Polanki Gowtham, Shaik Mohamad Haneef, T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Amitabh Sinha, K.V. Girish Chowdary

Table of Content
1. participation of stakeholders in policy-making. (Para 1 , 3)
2. need for state involvement in community schemes. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. factual context of hunger deaths in specific states. (Para 8 , 9)
4. grant of time and costs related decisions. (Para 10 , 12 , 14)
5. conclusion on further proceedings. (Para 11 , 13 , 15)

ORDER :

1. Heard Ms. Ashima Mandla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Ms. Madhvi Divan, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India and other learned counsels appearing for the States and Union Territories at a considerable length.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Union Territory of Ladakh are directed to file their respective counter affidavits within a period of two weeks from today, without fail.

3. It is submitted by learned Additional Solicitor General that the issues which are raised in this Writ Petition with regard to creating community kitchens to take care of hunger deaths or malnutrition of children are under active consideration of the Union of India and they are awaiting expert reports on the subject.

4. We are of the considered view that unti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top