Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court stated that place of birth cannot be treated as the sole criterion to determine a person’s nativity. According to the Court, social belongingness should also be considered.

According to the Kerala High Court, the petitions had raised no valid point which proved mala-fide intentions or illegality on the part of the respondents.

The Kerala High Court held that medical examinations can be conducted by medical practitioners if they suspect that internal injuries have been inflicted on accused persons as a result of custodial torture.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld the Kerala High Court’s decision in upholding the dismissal of permission which was sought by the Public Prosecutor in the Kerala Assembly case and held that vandalism of property cannot be equated to freedom of speech in the House.

In the petition in which Sister Lucy had argued her case as party-in-person and had challenged her eviction from her convent, the Kerala High Court held that it would not look into her right to continue in the convent. Additionally, the Court stated that police protection can only be provided outside the convent.

After petitions were filed by aggrieved students and the Kerala Students Union challenging the decision of the Government in changing its policy regarding grant of grace marks and deciding that grace marks would not be awarded to SSLC and Plus two students, the Kerala High Court sought a reply from the State Government regarding its grace marks policy.

The High Court issued directions to State Government to frame a policy to regulate crowdfunding to prevent the misuse of the funds being collected.

The Kerala High Court issued notice and directions to the State Government for the implementation of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and its rules to ensure effective eradication of the dowry system from the society.

The Kerala High Court, while passing an interim order, pertaining to overcrowding at liquor shops stated that ‘Health is more important than revenue.’

A student was denied Science Stream by the school authorities by stating that her score in Maths was low even though the stream chosen by her did not include Maths in it. The Kerala High Court has directed CBSE to provide information on the same and has listed the matter for another day.

The case was filed with respect to the exorbitant fees that were being levied by the private medical colleges in the state of Kerala. The Kerala High Court had ordered the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee that the audited sheets should be examined to see whether the management expenditure was excluded or not.

There were 5 writ petitions filed before the Kerala High Court with regard to Rule 56 of the Kerala Education Rules and Section 2 (IV) of the Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualifications) Act. These laws bestowed on the teachers of aided schools the power to contest in elections. These provisions were challenged on grounds of being violative of fundamental rights.

The Court expressed its indignation by stating that “Based on a false complaint, a person is in jail for about 77 days. This Court cannot shut its eye in such situations.”

The Kerala HC held that government orders could not take away the vested right of a government employee to receive salary. The court ruled that salary could prima facie be considered as property and deferment of salaries would amount to a violation of Article 300A of the Constitution as the government order did not have sufficient legal backing.