Constitution & Law Current Affairs - 2019
Summary of latest bill and acts passed or pending in 2019 in Parliament of India with their salient features and issues for Current Affairs 2019 preparation for various examinations such as UPSC, SSC, State Civil Services, CLAT, Judicial Services etc.
Category Wise PDF Compilations available at This Link
The new government at the Centre appointed senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi as the new Attorney General of India (AGI) to take over from G E Vahanvati as the 14th AG of the country.
The AGI is the Indian government’s chief legal advisor, and its primary lawyer in the Supreme Court of India. He is appointed by the President of India under Article 76(1) of the Constitution and holds office during the pleasure of the President. He must have qualification to be appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court. Like the Advocate General of a State, the Attorney General is not supposed to be a political appointee, in spirit, but this is not the case in practice. Every time a new government attains power at the Centre, all the law officers resign and law officers loyal to the new party are appointed.
Tags: Current Affairs 2014 • Supreme Court
As per a judgment by the Meghalaya High Court, Bangladesh nationals who have settled in Meghalaya before March 24, 1971 should be treated as Indians and they should be enrolled in the voters list.
The verdict was based on a petition filed by over 40 refugees, living Amjong village near the Assam-Meghalaya border in Meghalaya’s Ri-Bhoi district who were originally from Bangladesh, who were refused enrolment in the electoral roll and their citizenship certificates were seized by the district administration citing their citizenship as doubtful.
The court held that there was an understanding between the two nations as to who should be permitted to stay and who should be sent back to Bangladesh. It observed that as the forefathers of the petitioners entered India much before March 24, 1971 there was no question of deporting them now when they have acquired the right of permanent rehabilitation in Amjong village. The court dismissed the contention that they were Bangladesh citizens and directed the state government and the Centre not to disturb them, but to provide them proper rehabilitation. Earlier, the state government had contended that the petitioners and their forefathers were not permanent citizens and were rehabilitated temporarily by the autonomous district council.