Saint Philip the Apostle Catholic Church 2012 Ministry Fair – Nov. 4

first_img Pasadena Will Allow Vaccinated People to Go Without Masks in Most Settings Starting on Tuesday Community News More Cool Stuff Faith & Religion Events Saint Philip the Apostle Catholic Church 2012 Ministry Fair – Nov. 4 Published on Monday, October 29, 2012 | 9:05 pm Name (required)  Mail (required) (not be published)  Website  Pasadena’s ‘626 Day’ Aims to Celebrate City, Boost Local Economy Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m. faithfernandez More » ShareTweetShare on Google+Pin on PinterestSend with WhatsApp,Virtual Schools PasadenaHomes Solve Community/Gov/Pub SafetyPASADENA EVENTS & ACTIVITIES CALENDARClick here for Movie Showtimes HerbeautyTop Important Things You Never Knew About MicrobladingHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThese Are 15 Great Style Tips From Asian WomenHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyShort On Time? 10-Minute Workouts Are Just What You NeedHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty10 Of The Most Notorious Female Spies In HistoryHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty9 Of The Best Family Friendly Dog BreedsHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyRed Meat Is Dangerous And Here Is The ProofHerbeautyHerbeauty First Heatwave Expected Next Week 9 recommended0 commentsShareShareTweetSharePin it center_img Subscribe Community News Make a comment EVENTS & ENTERTAINMENT | FOOD & DRINK | THE ARTS | REAL ESTATE | HOME & GARDEN | WELLNESS | SOCIAL SCENE | GETAWAYS | PARENTS & KIDS Next Sunday, November 4, 2012, St. Philip the Apostle Church will sponsor its 2012 Ministry Fair. The theme of this year’s Fair is “Faith in Action!”. Ministry Fair 2012 will be held in Holy Angel Parish Hall between the hours of 8:00 am and 2:00 pm.As in the past, passports will be handed out to all of parishioners and guests who will be attending the Fair. Our ministries will be grouped according to color. Each individual who has received a signature on their passport from at least one ministry of each color will be entitled to participate in a drawing. We have some fabulous prizes in store for the winners of the drawing.Prizes include 2 tickets to Disneyland, 2 tickets to our Living With Passion & Purpose event in March 2013, Buca di Beppo scrip, lunch for 2 at Market On Holly, certificates for a 10 oz. yogurt at Cherry On Top as well as other fabulous prizes too numerous to mention here. A special prize will be awarded to the best decorated ministry table.The church is really excited about this year’s Ministry Fair and hope that you will be as well. Please come down and join the excitement!Saint Philip the Apostle Catholic Church, 151 S. Hill Avenue, Pasadena, www.stphiliptheapostle.org Top of the News Business News Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Home of the Week: Unique Pasadena Home Located on Madeline Drive, Pasadenalast_img read more

Read more

Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Honors 2017 Mother of the Year Tonita Fernandez

first_imgHerbeautyThese Lipsticks Are Designed To Make Your Teeth Appear Whiter!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyA Mental Health Chatbot Which Helps People With DepressionHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty6 Trends To Look Like An Eye-Candy And 6 To Forget AboutHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty8 Easy Exotic Meals Anyone Can MakeHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty8 Celebrities Who’ve Lost Their FandomsHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty10 Questions To Start Conversation Way Better Than ‘How U Doing?’HerbeautyHerbeauty Subscribe 11 recommended0 commentsShareShareTweetSharePin it Pasadena Will Allow Vaccinated People to Go Without Masks in Most Settings Starting on Tuesday More Cool Stuff Make a comment Pasadena teacher Tonita Fernandez will be honored as 2017 Mother of the Year by the Pasadena Chapter of the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority on Saturday, May 13, during the 29th Annual Fashionetta Salute to Mothers and Scholarship Luncheon and Fashion Show at the Glendale Hilton, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.Fernandez is the Diversity Coordinator and teaches ?rst grade at Chandler School in Pasadena, one of the African American teachers handling core subjects. Students and parents see her as a teacher who instills the passion to learn, being a warm, nurturing, enthusiastic and caring teacher.Fernandez graduated from Pasadena High School and has a Bachelor’s degree from LaVerne College and a Master’s in Education/Human Development from Paci?c Oaks College.She is the proud mother of six children – one girl and ?ve boys – plus 22 godchildren. She has adopted three of her children and is doing foster care with two of her children as she completes the adoption process.Fernandez said she feels blessed to be able to make a difference in the lives of these children and spends a great deal of time and dedication encouraging and directing their path.Fernandez loves to help children thrive and be their best. She achieves this in her personal, professional and volunteer life, working with Camp?re Boys and Girls, Group Homes, Sycamores and the National Foster Care Organization.Fernandez also owns and operates Superstar Education and Enrichment for Kids, a private tutoring and enrichment center that is more commonly known as “the cottage.”Her primary goal with this facility is to provide services to children from all environments with a special focus on foster children where she helps them move forward socially and academically. She has worked with low-income, under-served and neglected youth her entire career.Fernandez finds time out of her busy life to craft, hike, coach sports and travel. She enjoys gospel music and considers such songs as “If I Could Help Somebody” and “I Won’t Complain” her favorites. Her life philosophy is “In life, it is not about what you can get but what you can give.”To attend the Fashionetta event and join the recognition for Tonita Fernandez, visit www.thepaif.org and purchase a ticket. Your support is needed and appreciated. Community News First Heatwave Expected Next Week Featured Banner Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Honors 2017 Mother of the Year Tonita Fernandez From STAFF REPORTS Published on Thursday, May 4, 2017 | 5:45 pm Name (required)  Mail (required) (not be published)  Website center_img faithfernandez More » ShareTweetShare on Google+Pin on PinterestSend with WhatsApp,Virtual Schools PasadenaHomes Solve Community/Gov/Pub SafetyCitizen Service CenterPASADENA EVENTS & ACTIVITIES CALENDARClick here for Movie Showtimes Pasadena’s ‘626 Day’ Aims to Celebrate City, Boost Local Economy Community News Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Top of the News EVENTS & ENTERTAINMENT | FOOD & DRINK | THE ARTS | REAL ESTATE | HOME & GARDEN | WELLNESS | SOCIAL SCENE | GETAWAYS | PARENTS & KIDS Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m. Business News Home of the Week: Unique Pasadena Home Located on Madeline Drive, Pasadenalast_img read more

Read more

Rimini Street Now an Approved Supplier on New Zealand Government Marketplace

first_img WhatsApp Rimini Street Now an Approved Supplier on New Zealand Government Marketplace Local NewsBusiness Facebook Pinterest Previous articleCommunity Reinvestment Fund, USA Names Three to Board of TrusteesNext articleWells Fargo Invests in Six Black-Owned Banks Digital AIM Web Support Twitter LAS VEGAS–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Feb 8, 2021– Rimini Street, Inc. (Nasdaq: RMNI), a global provider of enterprise software products and services, the leading third-party support provider for Oracle and SAP software products and a Salesforce partner, today announced it has become an approved supplier on the New Zealand Government Marketplace through a Collaborative Marketplace Agreement (CMA). As an approved supplier on Marketplace, Rimini Street has completed the open primary procurement process so agencies can now more easily procure the Company’s services and do not need to spend the time and effort to negotiate their own contract terms or pricing. This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210208005003/en/ Rimini Street Now an Approved Supplier on New Zealand Government Marketplace (Photo: Business Wire) While Rimini Street already works with a number of government agencies in New Zealand, including the University of Auckland, the new agreement has the potential to generate significant additional savings on enterprise software support for New Zealand’s government agencies at all levels, from local to central and including universities and schools. The agreement can be accessed online by agencies at www.marketplace.govt.nz. These agencies will now have greater access to Rimini Street’s services including the provision of support and maintenance for Oracle, SAP and Salesforce enterprise software implementations. Last year, Rimini Street signed a Whole-Of-Government volume sourcing agreement with the Australian Government and has since added more than 10 agencies through the agreement. All Rimini Street clients, whether private or public organizations, benefit from the Company’s flexible, premium-level enterprise software support model, including its industry-leading Service Level Agreement (SLA) of 10-minute response times for all critical Priority 1 cases. Clients are also assigned a Primary Support Engineer, backed by a team of functional and technical experts, who have an average of 15 years’ experience in the client’s software system. Rimini Street also guarantees support for a client’s current enterprise software system for a minimum of 15 additional years from the time that they switch to Rimini Street. “The Collaborative Marketplace Agreement ensures that agencies across New Zealand are now able to easily source Rimini Street’s more affordable and higher quality alternatives for their Oracle, SAP and Salesforce enterprise software maintenance needs,” said Emmanuelle Hose, regional general manager for Australia and New Zealand, Rimini Street. “This new agreement will provide more choice for New Zealand government agencies by enabling a more streamlined procurement process for critical enterprise software services, while also helping them optimize their IT spend.” About Rimini Street, Inc. Rimini Street, Inc. (Nasdaq: RMNI) is a global provider of enterprise software products and services, the leading third-party support provider for Oracle and SAP software products and a Salesforce partner. The Company offers premium, ultra-responsive and integrated application management and support services that enable enterprise software licensees to save significant costs, free up resources for innovation and achieve better business outcomes. To date, more than 3,700 Fortune 500, Fortune Global 100, midmarket, public sector and other organizations from a broad range of industries have relied on Rimini Street as their trusted application enterprise software products and services provider. To learn more, please visit http://www.riministreet.com, follow @riministreet on Twitter and find Rimini Street on Facebook and LinkedIn. Forward-Looking Statements Certain statements included in this communication are not historical facts but are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements generally are accompanied by words such as “may,” “should,” “would,” “plan,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “seem,” “seek,” “continue,” “future,” “will,” “expect,” “outlook” or other similar words, phrases or expressions. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our expectations of future events, future opportunities, global expansion and other growth initiatives and our investments in such initiatives. These statements are based on various assumptions and on the current expectations of management and are not predictions of actual performance, nor are these statements of historical facts. These statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties regarding Rimini Street’s business, and actual results may differ materially. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the duration of and operational and financial impacts on our business of the COVID-19 pandemic and related economic impact, as well as the actions taken by governmental authorities, clients or others in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; catastrophic events that disrupt our business or that of our current and prospective clients, changes in the business environment in which Rimini Street operates, including inflation and interest rates, and general financial, economic, regulatory and political conditions affecting the industry in which Rimini Street operates; adverse developments in pending litigation or in the government inquiry or any new litigation; our need and ability to raise additional equity or debt financing on favorable terms and our ability to generate cash flows from operations to help fund increased investment in our growth initiatives; the sufficiency of our cash and cash equivalents to meet our liquidity requirements; the terms and impact of our outstanding 13.00% Series A Preferred Stock; changes in taxes, laws and regulations; competitive product and pricing activity; difficulties of managing growth profitably; the customer adoption of our recently introduced products and services, including our Application Management Services (AMS), Rimini Street Advanced Database Security, and services for Salesforce Sales Cloud and Service Cloud products, in addition to other products and services we expect to introduce in the near future; the loss of one or more members of Rimini Street’s management team; uncertainty as to the long-term value of Rimini Street’s equity securities; and those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors” in Rimini Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on November 5, 2020, and as updated from time to time by Rimini Street’s future Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and other filings by Rimini Street with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, forward-looking statements provide Rimini Street’s expectations, plans or forecasts of future events and views as of the date of this communication. Rimini Street anticipates that subsequent events and developments will cause Rimini Street’s assessments to change. However, while Rimini Street may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, Rimini Street specifically disclaims any obligation to do so, except as required by law. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing Rimini Street’s assessments as of any date subsequent to the date of this communication. © 2021 Rimini Street, Inc. All rights reserved. “Rimini Street” is a registered trademark of Rimini Street, Inc. in the United States and other countries, and Rimini Street, the Rimini Street logo, and combinations thereof, and other marks marked by TM are trademarks of Rimini Street, Inc. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners, and unless otherwise specified, Rimini Street claims no affiliation, endorsement, or association with any such trademark holder or other companies referenced herein. View source version on businesswire.com:https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210208005003/en/ CONTACT: Michelle McGlocklin Rimini Street, Inc. +1 925 523-8414 [email protected] KEYWORD: AUSTRALIA/OCEANIA NEW ZEALAND UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA NEVADA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: PUBLIC POLICY/GOVERNMENT SOFTWARE WHITE HOUSE/FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STATE/LOCAL CONSULTING ACCOUNTING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TECHNOLOGY SOURCE: Rimini Street, Inc. Copyright Business Wire 2021. PUB: 02/08/2021 01:00 PM/DISC: 02/08/2021 01:01 PM http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210208005003/encenter_img TAGS  Facebook Twitter Pinterest WhatsApp By Digital AIM Web Support – February 8, 2021 last_img read more

Read more

Bhima Koregaon : SC Grants One More Week To Navlakha & Teltumbde To Surrender

first_imgTop StoriesBhima Koregaon : SC Grants One More Week To Navlakha & Teltumbde To Surrender Sanya Talwar8 April 2020 12:37 AMShare This – x[Updated]The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted one more week time to activists Gautam Navlakha & Anand Teltumbde to surrender in the case registered under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) alleging Maoist links in connection with Bhima Koregaon violence. A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra & Indira Banerjee made it clear that there will not be further extension of…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?Login[Updated]The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted one more week time to activists Gautam Navlakha & Anand Teltumbde to surrender in the case registered under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) alleging Maoist links in connection with Bhima Koregaon violence. A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra & Indira Banerjee made it clear that there will not be further extension of time. The bench observed that it expected the accused to surrender in compliance of the March 16 order of the Court.”Though we expected that the accused would surrender, honouring the order of this Court, they have not done so. We are told that in Bombay, Courts are functioning. It would have been appropriate for the accused to surrender as the courts are open and not totally closed”, the bench observed.”However, since the petitioners have enjoyed the protection for long, by way of last opportunity, we extend the time granted to surrender for one week”, the bench added.Counsel appearing for the activists submitted that both activists were over 65 years old and suffered heart ailments.”Going to prison during this time of Coronavirus is virtually a death sentence” added the activists’ lawyer.Solicitor general Tushar Mehta vociferously opposed the plea. He added that this was “only a mechanism to buy time” and that “both activists were facing serious charges”.Bhima Koregaon : SC Grants One More Week To Navlakha & Teltumbde To Surrender #BhimaKoregaon#GautamNavlkakha#AnandTeltumbde https://t.co/SjQpPX3ICA pic.twitter.com/jgzRokdgwR— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) April 8, 2020On March 16, a bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and M R Shah had dismissed the special leave petitions filed by them challenging the February 15 judgments of Bombay High Court which denied them pre-arrest bail on the finding that a prima facie case was made out against them based on materials on record.However, the bench granted the petitioners three weeks time to surrender.  The bench had said that the petitions for anticipatory bail were not maintainable, in the light of the material collected by the investigating agency. The bench referred to Section 43D(4) of UAPA, which states that anticipatory bail should not be granted if the Court is satisfied about the existence of a prima facie case. The case pertains to the violent incidents which occurred on January 1, 2018 at Bhima Koregaon, near Pune during the Dalit organizations’ commemoration of 200th anniversary of Victory of Koregaon Battle.The Pune police alleged that violence was incited by the Elgaar Parishad meeting held at Pune the previous day. It was alleged that the meeting was organized by persons having nexus with banned Maoist organizations. The first wave of arrests were made by the police in June 2018. The arrested persons were anti-caste activist Sudhir Dhawale, human rights lawyer Surendra Gadling, Forest Rights Act activist Mahesh Raut, retired English professor Shoma Sen and human rights activist Rona Wilson, an activist with the Committee for Release of Political Prisoners. Later, activist-lawyer Sudha Bharadwaj, Telugu poet Varavara Rao, activists Arun Ferreira and Vernon Gonsalves were arrested. In November 2018, the police filed the first chargesheet in the case against the six persons arrested in June 2018. In February 2019, supprelementary chargesheet against Sudha Bharadwaj, Varavara Rao, Arun Ferreira and Gonsalves was filed. Navlakha and Teltumbde are not named in the chargesheet. The National Investigation Agency took over the investigation of the case from Maharashtra Police in February.Next Storylast_img read more

Read more

Discouraging Article 32 Habeas Corpus Petitions – The Legal Basis

first_imgColumnsDiscouraging Article 32 Habeas Corpus Petitions – The Legal Basis Prasanna S22 Nov 2020 10:32 PMShare This – xObservations by a bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India while hearing a habeas corpus writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution that the court is trying to discourage Article 32 Petitions – has understandably received coverage critical of the judicial attitude of the court. Particularly, as it came in the backdrop of an order granting interim…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginObservations by a bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India while hearing a habeas corpus writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution that the court is trying to discourage Article 32 Petitions – has understandably received coverage critical of the judicial attitude of the court. Particularly, as it came in the backdrop of an order granting interim bail to Arnab Goswami in a hastily convened vacation hearing punctuated by several oral observations by the bench on the paramountcy of personal liberty. This also led the court to later lament how the coverage of its observations in the habeas corpus matter had been unfair. In this article, we try and examine the basis of the court’s observations that they are trying to discourage Article 32 habeas corpus petitions. The court’s observations ostensibly come from passage in Union of India v. Paul Manickam (2003) 8 SCC 342, that is often relied on by the State to defeat Article 32 habeas corpus petitions that are preferred in the first instance without going first to the High Court. The passage in the judgment authored by Arijit Pasayat J, as part of a bench of two judges, is as follows. “22. Another aspect which has been highlighted is that many unscrupulous petitioners are approaching this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the order of detention directly without first approaching the High Courts concerned. It is appropriate that the High Court concerned under whose jurisdiction the order of detention has been passed by the State Government or Union Territory should be approached first. In order to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution to approach this Court directly, it has to be shown by the petitioner as to why the High Court has not been approached, could not be approached or it is futile to approach the High Court. Unless satisfactory reasons are indicated in this regard, filing of petition in such matters directly under Article 32 of the Constitution is to be discouraged.” On the face of it then, the court is just following a precedent and the law laid down in an earlier case. However, on a closer examination, it becomes clear why this passage in Paul Manickam ought to not have any value as a precedent at all, notwithstanding it being part of a pronouncement of the highest court of the land. First, the Paul Manickam decision arose in the contest of a Special Leave Petition filed under Article 136 challenging a judgment of the High Court under Article 226 quashing a preventive detention order. The scope and ambit of the right under Article 32 to challenge detention orders and to seek a habeas corpus writ was not in issue at all. It is settled law that only the ratio decidendi of the court is a precedent and observations that have no nexus with the issue that is being decided in a case have no precedential value. Second, the Court in Paul Manickam neither considered nor distinguished prior constitution bench judgments that have expressly held that Article 32 is the right and prerogative of the petitioner and that the petitions cannot be dismissed merely because the petitioner did not approach the High Court first. The unambgious decision of Das CJ writing for himself and three others as part of five-judge bench in K.K. Kochunni v. State of Madras 1959 Supp (2) SCR 316 considered the issue and had this to observe. “8. Shri Purshottam Tricumdas appearing for some of the respondents has taken a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the petitions. The argument in support of his objection has been developed and elaborated by him in several ways. In the first place, he contends that the petitions, insofar as they pray for the issue of a writ of mandamus, are not maintainable because the petitioners have an adequate remedy in that they can agitate the question now sought to be raised on these petitions and get relief in the pauper suit filed by one of the respondents after the passing of the impugned Act. This argument overlooks the fact that the present petitions are under Article 32 of the Constitution which is itself a guaranteed right. In Rashid Ahmed v. Municipal Board, Kairana [1950 SCR 566.] this Court repelled the submission of the Advocate-General of Uttar Pradesh to the effect that, as the petitioner had an adequate legal remedy by way of appeal, this Court should not grant any writ in the nature of the prerogative writ of mandamus or certiorari and observed: “There can be no question that the existence of an adequate legal remedy is a thing to be taken into consideration in the matter of granting writs, but the powers given to this Court under Article 32 are much wider and are not confined to issuing prerogative writs only.” Further, even if the existence of other adequate legal remedy may be taken into consideration by the High Court in deciding whether it should issue any of the prerogative writs on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, as to which we say nothing now — this Court cannot, on a similar ground, decline to entertain a petition under Article 32, for the right to move this Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution is itself a guaranteed right. It has accordingly been held by this Court in Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras [1950 SCR 594] that under the Constitution this Court is constituted the protector and guarantor of fundamental rights and it cannot, consistently with the responsibility so laid upon it, refuse to entertain applications seeking the protection of this Court against infringement of such rights, although such applications are made to this Court in the first instance without resort to a High Court having concurrent jurisdiction in the matter. The mere existence of an adequate alternative legal remedy cannot per se be a good and sufficient ground for throwing out a petition under Article 32, if the existence of a fundamental right and a breach, actual or threatened, of such right is alleged and is prima facie established on the petition.” The extended context given in the earlier quote is to labour the point that the issue of the Court’s powers to throw out Article 32 petitions on the ground that the petitioner has not approached the high court first or has not tendered adequate explanation for not approaching the high court first actually arose in Kochunni and the decision . The matter however does not end there. There is perhaps one argument that could be made – that is, Paul Manickam was specific in the context of habeas corpus writs which are distinct from other Article 32 petitions – to the extent that a second habeas corpus petition to the Supreme Court under Article 32 can be preferred even if a 226 writ is denied. (In fact, habeas corpus petitions are considered a species of their own (see Dharyao v State of U.P. AIR 1961 SC 1457). This is unlike other kinds of writs wherein once 226 jurisdiction of the high court is invoked, an article 32 petition ceases to be maintainable, being hit by the doctrine of res judicata. The distinction becomes germane because 32 and 226 are mutually exclusive for a person in other types of writs, and there is no such problem with a habeas corpus writ and therefore there is no real denial of Article 32 remedy even if the petitioner is directed first to approach the High Court under Article 226. However, for such distinction to be proper in law, it has to come through a judicial pronouncement that clearly distinguishes, clarifies or overrules the previous constitution bench judgments by larger bench or atleast of a bench that is coordinate strength – in a matter that this question actually arises. Moreover, the rationale behind non-applicability of res judicata to habeas corpus petitions is the consideration of paramountcy of personal liberty as a protected constitutional right and the role of the court as its protector (Ghulam Sarwar v Union Of India AIR 1967 SC 1335, 5-Judge bench, Subbarao CJ). That being the case, it is not immediately apparent why that distinction that was made to more effectively protect personal liberty ought to be understood to serve as a distinction to defeat the interests in the case of dealing with an Article 32 Petition for habeas corpus preferred in the first instance. The third argument that can perhaps be advanced is a favourite of the State in not just habeas corpus cases, but many other Article 32 petitions. That is, the consideration of the court’s docket and the workload of the Supreme Court and it being a good policy to have persons approach the High Court first so that flood gates of litigation in Supreme Court don’t open. Apart from this argument having no independent standing in light of Article 32 being a fundamental right in itself and the Supreme Court’s own holding of its lack of discretion to entertain or refuse Article 32 petitions so long as there is a fundamental right asserted and infringement claimed in the petition, it also suffers on another count. The writ docket in the supreme court is a miniscule fraction of its workload. In 2019 for instance, only 1947 Writ Petitions were registered in the Supreme Court, as against more than 42000 Special Leave Petitions under Article 136. This is despite the remedy under Article 136 being a discretionary one and the remedy under Article 32, a matter of right. The Court’s humongous workload in its discretionary jurisdiction cannot rationally be used to defeat its duty to entertain petitions under Article 32. Moreover, it is in fact the State’s own failure that it has not created more courts to supplement the Supreme Court in exercising Article 32 jurisdiction, which it is empowered to do under Clause (3) of that article – something that the courts ought not to allow the State to take advantage of. This leads us to another syndrome that has afflicted not just our court, but also those that comment on the court. That is the clamour to rush to brand writ petitions – particularly public interest litigation as frivolous or unworthy of the supreme court’s time and indeed exhorting the court to dismiss such petitions with costs : missing totally the prerogative and the right of every citizen under Article 32 to bring claims to the Supreme Court. The social cost of guaranteeing such a remedy is necessarily that there will from time to time be causes that are objectively and truly unworthy of the Supreme Court’s time. But the answer to that cannot be making Article 32 a discretionary remedy akin to Article 136 where the court can on a whim decide whether or not the complained of cause is worthy of its time and attention. Some of the court’s recent orders imposing costs on a petition that sought to protect artifacts found during the Ayodhya excavation, or the refusal to entertain the petition that sought a declaration epidemic act as unconstitutional and asking the Petitioner to approach the high court first – are clearly not in keeping with the letter and the purpose of Article 32 being a guaranteed right. If Article 32 were to be realised as a guaranteed right, the court ought to ordinarily not dismiss such petitions in limine and whenever it does, it must do so with a speaking order showing how the petition discloses no cause of action – i.e. it does not claim a fundamental right being engaged or that it does not claim of an infringement of that right.Views are personal.(Author is a practicing Lawyer in Delhi)Next Storylast_img read more

Read more

Little Angels School gym being used as a classroom

first_imgThe Principal of the Little Angels School in Letterkenny says while they’ve moved a step closer to a new school building, it’s likely to be this time next year before contractors are on site.At present, they are at the pre-qualification stage, in which builders with an interest in the job are applying for the right to tender.At present, a gym at the school is being used as a classroom, but Principal Ailbhe Dunne told Greg Hughes on today’s Nine til Noon Show that they hope to have a pre-fab on site to resolve that issue very shortly……..Audio Playerhttp://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/littleangels.mp300:0000:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume. Google+ FT Report: Derry City 2 St Pats 2 Journey home will be easier – Paul Hegarty WhatsApp Facebook WhatsApp Derry draw with Pats: Higgins & Thomson Reaction Twitter Pinterest Pinterest Google+center_img AudioHomepage BannerNews Twitter Previous articleJobs boost for North WestNext articleGRA calls on minister to withdraw Cavan policing comments News Highland RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Little Angels School gym being used as a classroom Harps come back to win in Waterford Facebook News, Sport and Obituaries on Monday May 24th DL Debate – 24/05/21 By News Highland – November 11, 2019 last_img read more

Read more

A Christmas miracle at midnight

first_img By The Penny Hoarder Penny Hoarder Issues “Urgent” Alert: 6 Companies Are… A Christmas miracle at midnight Shepherds were out in the fields so they were the first ones to see the Angel of the Lord and to know.All of a sudden there was this bright light in the sky and ab the angel just came out of nowhere and told the shepherds that the Baby Jesus had been born and they hurried off to see him.We had learned about that in Sunday school. But what our Sunday school teacher didn’t tell us was the best part about the night the Baby Jesus was born.People all over the world had been waiting for the Baby Jesus to be born, my granny said.  But it was not just people that were waiting. The animals all over the world were waiting, too. Next UpThis is what she said. On that first Christmas Eve night so long ago, the Baby Jesus was born in a cold, cold barn in a place called Bethlehem. People all over the world had been waiting for the Baby Jesus to be born my granny said, but they didn’t have radios so God sent an angel to let everybody know that the Baby Jesus had been born. So, when the animals heard the Baby Jesus’ birth cry, they welcomed Him into the world with their special sounds. The cows mooed. The horses whinnied. Donkeys brayed. Wolves howled. Lions roared. Mice squeaked and the elephant trumpeted his welcome. I could image what that must have been like, all the animals welcoming the Baby Jesus with their special sounds, but it was not a noisy racket. All of their special sounds blended together to make the most beautiful music that was heard all over the world.Then, all of the animals got down on their knees to worship the Baby Jesus. All over the world, the animals knelt together. What a wonderful sight must have been, the baby lamb kneeling right next to a big lion. That was because the Baby Jesus brought love and peace to the world, my granny said.That’s what happened at midnight on the first Christmas Eve. My granny said, from that night on, every year at midnight on Christmas Eve, all of the animals all over the world kneel to worship Jesus Christ the Savior of the World.In my child’s mind, that was the most wonderful thought of Christmas –all the animals kneeling to worship a little baby called Jesus. More than Sandy Claus coming, I wanted to see the animals kneeling in worship.And, maybe I did venture out on that cold, dark Christmas Eve or, perhaps, it was just a dream that warmed my heart on that night so long ago.And, it will be once again, on Christmas Eve 2020 as I stand in the icy cold in anticipation of the miracle at midnight. Book Nook to reopen Remember America’s heroes on Memorial Day The icy breath billowed from for the cows pastured in the nearby field. Even though Mama had warmed a blanket by the fire and rushed to wrap my feet with it when I jumped in the bed, just the thought of the cold, icy nighttime made me shiver.I was almost nine years old. Plenty old enough to go out on a cold, winter’s night. So, when I heard the clock strike midnight, I was going to put on my shoes and coat, go stand by the fence and see for myself a Christmas miracle that my granny so often told me about. Troy falls to No. 13 Clemson Published 10:24 pm Friday, December 18, 2020center_img You Might Like Who will get vaccinated first? Vaccines from Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer are nearing approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  Politicians will now decide who… read more Pike County Sheriff’s Office offering community child ID kits Email the author Sponsored Content Around the WebMd: Do This Immediately if You Have Diabetes (Watch)Blood Sugar BlasterIf You Have Ringing Ears Do This Immediately (Ends Tinnitus)Healthier LivingWomen Only: Stretch This Muscle to Stop Bladder Leakage (Watch)Patriot Health ZoneHave an Enlarged Prostate? Urologist Reveals: Do This Immediately (Watch)Healthier LivingRemoving Moles & Skin Tags Has Never Been This EasyEssential Health32-second Stretch Ends Back Pain & Sciatica (Watch)Healthier LivingThe content you see here is paid for by the advertiser or content provider whose link you click on, and is recommended to you by Revcontent. As the leading platform for native advertising and content recommendation, Revcontent uses interest based targeting to select content that we think will be of particular interest to you. We encourage you to view your opt out options in Revcontent’s Privacy PolicyWant your content to appear on sites like this?Increase Your Engagement Now!Want to report this publisher’s content as misinformation?Submit a ReportGot it, thanks!Remove Content Link?Please choose a reason below:Fake NewsMisleadingNot InterestedOffensiveRepetitiveSubmitCancel By Jaine Treadwell Plans underway for historic Pike County celebration Print Article Latest Storieslast_img read more

Read more

Whittni Orton Takes Dellinger Invitational Individual Title; Anna Camp Places 24th

first_img FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailSPRINGFIELD, Ore.-Saturday, former Panguitch High School star Whittni Orton took the individual title in the women’s 6000 meter run  at the Dellinger Invitational at Springfield, Ore. hosted by the University of Oregon.Orton, who is in her junior season, took the title in a time of 19:25.80, besting her teammate, Erica Birk, who placed second at 19:30.80.Orton’s heroics also allowed the Cougar women to take the overall team title with a score of 35.Former Millard High School star, junior Anna Camp, placed 24th overall in a time of 20:31.50.Orton, Camp and their BYU teammates are next in action October 19 at the pre-nationals invitational at Indiana State University in Terre Haute, Ind.Indiana State will host the NCAA Division I national championship meet November 23. Brad James September 28, 2019 /Sports News – Local Whittni Orton Takes Dellinger Invitational Individual Title; Anna Camp Places 24th Tags: Anna Camp/Erica Birk/Indiana State University/Whittni Orton Written bylast_img read more

Read more

No. 24 USC holds off Utah 91-85 in double overtime at Pac-12

first_img FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailLAS VEGAS (AP) — Evan Mobley scored 13 of his 26 points in the two overtimes and No. 24 Southern California outlasted scrappy Utah 91-85 in the Pac-12 quarterfinals.The second-seeded Trojans had a hard time shaking the seventh-seeded Utes in a game filled with methodical possessions. Utah hung around after trailing by 10 midway through the second half and rallied to tie the game on Ian Martinez’s two free throws with 2.3 seconds left in regulation.The Utes tied it again in the first overtime on Alfonzo Plummer’s 3-pointer with 24 seconds left.Mobley had five points in the first overtime and eight more in the second to send the Trojans into Friday’s semifinals against the California-Colorado winner. Tags: Pac-12/Pac-12 tournament/USC Trojans/Utah Runnin’ Utes Basketball Associated Press Written by March 12, 2021 /Sports News – Local No. 24 USC holds off Utah 91-85 in double overtime at Pac-12last_img read more

Read more

L-3 Maritime Systems Awarded Contract to Supply Seaframe Control System for LCS

first_img View post tag: system L-3 Maritime Systems Awarded Contract to Supply Seaframe Control System for LCS View post tag: News by topic Back to overview,Home naval-today L-3 Maritime Systems Awarded Contract to Supply Seaframe Control System for LCS Industry news View post tag: Systems View post tag: contract View post tag: control L-3 Maritime Systems announced today that it has been awarded a contract from General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems to supply its Seaframe Control System for the next Independence variant Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The contract is for the first ship and includes options for an additional 14 ships.L-3 Maritime Systems’ Seaframe Control System will provide advanced automation and control of the ship’s propulsion, electrical, ventilation and other machinery systems. The system’s automation capabilities successfully achieve the reduced manning requirements mandated for the U.S. Navy‘s newest class of surface ship combatants.“We are pleased to deliver affordable, open architecture solutions to the U.S. Navy for this program, and look forward to working with General Dynamics and its prime contractor, Austal, to provide the Navy with these extremely capable ships,” said Don Roussinos, president of L-3 Maritime Systems.About L-3 Maritime SystemsL-3 Maritime Systems, a division of L-3 Marine & Power Systems, is a leading supplier of marine systems and electronics, including integrated bridge, navigation, communications, control and sensing systems for the U.S. Navy, the Military Sealift Command, the U.S. Coast Guard and allied navies. L-3 Maritime Systems also produces solutions for naval applications such as automated battery and environmental monitoring systems, alarm and announcing systems, video data distribution systems, computer information systems, integrated communications systems, and integrated platform management systems.Comprised of more than 25 operating companies, L-3 Marine & Power Systems (L-3 M&PS) is a worldwide leader in maritime automation and control, navigation, communications, dynamic positioning, and power distribution and conditioning for the U.S. Navy, allied foreign navies and commercial customers worldwide. With over 94 locations in 20 countries, L-3 M&PS is a cohesive, global partner with extensive capabilities and a proven track record in delivering the highest level of technology, service and integrationHeadquartered in New York City, L-3 Communications employs approximately 63,000 people worldwide and is a prime contractor in C3ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) systems, aircraft modernization and maintenance, and government services. L-3 is also a leading provider of a broad range of electronic systems used on military and commercial platforms. The company reported 2010 sales of $15.7 billion.[mappress]Source: L-3 Marine & Power Systems, April 21, 2011; View post tag: Navy View post tag: Naval Share this article View post tag: Awarded View post tag: Supply View post tag: Maritime April 21, 2011 View post tag: L-3 View post tag: Seaframe View post tag: LCSlast_img read more

Read more