High Court Logo
Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Smt. Justice Lisa Gill
Hon'ble The Chief Justice

"Learn to live in this world with self-respect". For Original Handwritten Constitution Click Here

HC Background2

Notifications

▾

High Court Calendar

HC Background3

Associated Links

Landmark Judgments

Landmark Judgments

HC Background4

W.P.(C) No. 115/2004

GENE CAMPAIGN . VS UNION OF INDIA

The Division Bench (two judges) of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict and the case was directed to be placed before a larger bench for further consideration. The Court directed the Union Government frame a National Policy on GM crops in consultation with all stakeholders including representatives from State Governments. Two separate judgments were authored by Justice Nagarathna and Justice Karol.Justice Nagarathna held that the approval granted by the Union Government for environmental release of transgenic mustard DMH-11 should be invalidated, as there was no consideration of the adverse effects of the transgenic crops on human, animal, and plant health. She directed the GEAC to submit a report on whether DMH-11 mustard is a herbicide resistant crop in consultation with all stakeholders, and to make the report She further directed the Union Government to ensure that the composition of the GEAC is suitably reformed in accordance with the TEC and Parliamentary Standing Committee reports.Justice Karol held that the question of ban on herbicide resistant crops is a matter of public policy and cannot be invalidated in view of precautionary principle. (This principle stipulates that in case of scientific uncertainty, appropriate actions must be taken to prevent irreversible harm to the environment.) He directed that field trials of DMH-11 shall continue strictly in accordance with the imposed safeguards. He further directed GEAC to conduct independent studies on GM organisms and upload it in its website in a timely manner. The GEAC should consider all environmental factors before granting future approvals and should endeavour to establish specifically designated farms for field testing in collaboration with the Union Government.

View Full Judgment
eAPHCR

eAPHCR

HC Background5

April 18 1961

Civil Appeal/147/1958

Hon'ble Justice R. P SINHA C. J., K. SUBBA RAO, RAGIIUBAR DA YAL and J. R. MUDHOLKAR

ABINASH CHANDRA BANNERJI AND OTHERS Vs. UTTARPARA HITAKARI SABHA AND OTHERS


April 18 1961

Civil Appeal/147/1958

Honourable Judge R. P SINHA C. J., K. SUBBA RAO, RAGIIUBAR DA YAL and J. R. MUDHOLKAR

ABINASH CHANDRA BANNERJI AND OTHERS Vs. UTTARPARA HITAKARI SABHA AND OTHERS


HC Background6

March 5 2021

WP/6533/2018

Hon'ble Justice R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

Kate Dandesh Kumar Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh,


March 5 2021

WP/6533/2018

Honourable Judge R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

Kate Dandesh Kumar Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh,


HC Image

Did you know?

Hon'ble Sri Justice L. Nageswara Rao

Hon'ble Sri Justice L. Nageswara Rao

The First judge from Andhra Pradesh elevated to Supreme Court of India from the Bar

Born on 08.06.1957 at Chirala, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh. Did his B.Com., B.L., from Nagarjuna University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. Enrolled as an Advocate on 29.07.1982 at Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh. From July, 1982 to January, 1984 practiced at the District Court, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. From January, 1985 to December, 1994 practiced at the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Hyderabad. From January 1995 to May, 2016 practiced at the Supreme Court of India. Designated as a Senior Advocate by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in December, 2000. Served as Additional Solicitor General of India from August 2003 to May, 2004 and again from 26.08.2013 to 18.12.2014. Appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court of India on 13.05.2016.