As per Section 11 of the MRPS Act, 2015, the Designated Officer or First Appellate Authority, as the case may be, is required to pay the imposed penalty amount within 30 days from the date of receiving the communication or order directing payment. If the penalty remains unpaid within this period, the Competent Authority, typically the head of the department or designated superior officer, is empowered to recover the amount directly from the salary of the concerned officer.
This right is enforceable through penalties on erring officers, disciplinary actions, and oversight by the Maharashtra State Commission for Right to Service. It overrides conflicting provisions in other laws to ensure effective implementation. Ultimately, this empowers citizens with a statutory entitlement to timely, accountable, and transparent government services.
Article 309 was central to the case because it empowers the State Government to frame rules regulating the recruitment and conditions of service for persons appointed to public services. The court referred to this provision to affirm that the government has the legal authority to unilaterally modify service conditions and prescribe departmental examinations as a prerequisite for promotion.
Constitutional Validity of Service Exam Rules of Karnataka Read Post »
The court clarified that for an act to constitute an atrocity under this section, there must be a specific intent to humiliate. It is not enough for an insult to occur; the accused must have the knowledge or awareness that the victim belongs to a SC or ST. The court noted that this awareness could be inferred from long-term association or residence in the same locality.
The Union has exclusive power for reasons connected with defense, foreign affairs, or the security of India (List I, Entry 9).
Both the Union and States have concurrent power for reasons connected with the security of a State, maintenance of public order, or maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community (List III, Entry 3).
Provision of Article 49 Provision of Article 49 reads as follows: 49. Protection of monuments and places and objects of
As the said site was declared as protected monument u/s 3 of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904, in 1921, do we really bound to carry over such declaration by the British Government under AMASR Act without any value assessment on the grounds of cultural, historical, artistic, national pride, etc.? Before such assessment we should take a note that British people were only here to loot this nation and we should not glorify any of such person in any way.
The Article 49 of the Constitution of India specifies that it shall be the obligation of the State to protect every monument or place or object of artistic or historic interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament to be of national importance, from spoliation, disfigurement, destruction, removal, disposal or export, as the case may be.”
1. Under Section 2(j) of the AMASR Act, respondents declared the said tomb and circular vault as ancient monument merely on account of its existence for more than 100 years. The said site does not fulfill any criteria of an ancient monument, as it contains only the remains of close person of the then former Governor. This site does not have any historical, archaeological or artistic significance which need to be protected as ancient monument by respondents on government spending.
मामले की सामान्य जानकारी: मामले का नाम: श्री रंगा रेड्डी बनाम पी सी सी टी- हैदराबाद- जीएसटी आदेश की तिथि:
