Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
A two-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court passed an order dated 10th August 2020 in a plea seeking discounts in school fees demanded by private and unaided schools in West Bengal. The court in its order has warned the petitioner against using social media to propagate his personal interests. The court had to issue such a warning because the petitioner had used social media to share the Affidavit filed by the state in this matter.
The court has further stated that it will not dismiss the petition because of this incident but if the petitioner does not refrain from propagating his interests, it can shut out the petitioner from the case and appoint an Amicus Curiae. The court has used a strict tone to issue warnings to the petitioner because it acknowledges the power of social media. Social media is a powerful weapon that can easily destroy and make lives, and therefore it should not be used recklessly. In its further observations, the court also stated that the petitioner has failed to furnish data pertaining to the fees charged by the majority of schools and has also failed to serve notices to all the schools that are going to be affected by the orders of the court in this plea.
The court further noted that copies of petitions and supplementary affidavits along with all the annexures have also not been forwarded to the Additional Solicitor General's office. In this background, the court clearly stated that it will take up this matter immediately when all the affected parties have been made aware of the proceedings. The court in its order acknowledged the above-mentioned facts and accordingly adjourned the hearing by a week. The court further directed the petitioner to serve notices to all the parties and ensure that the copies of the petition, supplementary affidavits, and annexures are forwarded to the Additional Solicitor General's office before the next hearing.
The court has also expressed its concerns over the physical appearance of advocates in the court amid the pandemic. The court has strictly reminded the advocates that physical appearance of advocates in the court is only restricted to persons not having the technological means to conduct litigation on virtual platforms
86540
103860
630
114
59824