Hon’ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma was born on 30th November 1961, in Madhya Pradesh’s Jabalpur. He completed his LLB degree with three university gold medals in 1984. He was also awarded National Merit Scholarship for Post Graduate Studies.
His father, Dr. B N Sharma was an eminent academician who served as a professor at Jabalpur University and the Vice-Chancellor of Barkatullah University. He was also an agriculturist. His mother, Shrimati Shanti Sharma was a principal in Maharani Lakshmibai Higher Secondary school and worked as a district education officer at Jabalpur before her retirement.
He is currently acting as Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. He is the former Chief Justice of Telangana High Court and Karnataka High Court. He has served as Hon’ble Justice of Karnataka High Court and Madhya Pradesh High Court.
Justice Sharma is also on the advisory board of the Law journal Published by National Law Institute University, Bhopal.
He enrolled as an advocate in the same year as he completed his law degree, 1984. His practice area included vast topics such as civil, constitutional, criminal, and civil matters before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur. In 1993, he was appointed as Additional Central Government Counsel and thereafter, senior panel counsel by the Government of India in 2004. At the young age of 42, he was designated as a Senior Advocate by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the year of 2003.
Hon’ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma is an avid reader and is known for his contribution to many universities. He has published innumerable research papers and articles.
There are various important judgments upheld by Hon’ble justice Satish Chandra Sharma, a few are stated below:
Manual Scavenging Problem
The All India Central Council Trade Unions had approached the court regarding the death of two workers due to a lack of oxygen while they were unclogging a manhole in the city of Kalaburagi.
A division bench of acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum stated that the prohibition of Employment as manual scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 rules must be followed. It was observed by the Hon’ble Justices that the persons involved in manual scavenging had no safety gear provided to them, there were no air purifier gas marks. It was further instructed that if it is necessary for a sewer to be cleaned manually the state government and all local bodies the statutory provisions under the act and rules ( specifically rule 3 to 8 ).
There are two active statutes relating to the eradication of manual scavenging: The Employment of Manual scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993 and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. While the 1993 Act banned manual scavenging in India, the 2013 Act provided punishment for engaging or appointing any person for hazardous cleaning of sewers and septic tanks.
It was thus concluded by the court that the manual scavengers should be rehabilitated by the Government and for this to happen a proper survey is to be conducted as the first step of the rehabilitation process.
Pothole problem of Bengaluru
A division bench of acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum while hearing a petition on the condition of pothole problem in Bengaluru observed that the issue kept resurfacing every three to four months after refilling.
The bench instructed the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to maintain and keep a check on the quality of the materials and work while the repair work takes place.
The court remarked that pothole filling process was not transparent. The bench observed that “ You see potholes only on this Kumara Krupa road, the road in front of 7 ministers’ bungalow, the road towards the High Court. But you don’t see potholes of other localities, where the common man lives “ to the BBMP Counsel.
The court granted the BBMP’s request for two weeks’ time to submit a status report.
Advertisements of politicians in Govt. projects problem
A division bench comprising Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum directed the state government to take prompt action for removing unauthorized advertisements, hoardings, display bards of political functionaries and political leaders, and to remove photographs of political persons in government projects, H M Venkatesh v. the State of Karnataka.
The Hon’ble Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma of the High Court of Telangana exhorted the judicial officers of the state to put sincere efforts towards speedy disposal of cases and qualitative adjudication. He was accompanied by Senior Judges – Hon’ble Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Hon’ble Justice P Naveen Rao, who called for cost-effective solutions for the litigants.
The bench stated, “The respondent-State is directed to ensure that in future also, no display boards, unauthorized advertisements, hoardings at public places as well as in respect of various Government projects are displayed in future. The Government is directed to take prompt action in the matter keeping in view the Circular and the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in W.P.(Civil) Nos.13/2003, 197/2004, and 302/2012 (Common Cause vs. Union of India).”
Illegal sale of CA site by KHB
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum allowed a hearing of a PIL petition filed by 72-year-old Adinarayanashetty of Koramangala.
The court observed that the procedures has been given up for obvious reasons, if such execution of sale deeds were permitted, there will be a situation of total anarchy in the system and will lead to favoritism.
The bench also expressed shock that the mentality of the KHB in violating the provisions of the law governing the allotment of civic amenity sites. The bench was displeased over the conduct of the trust for going back on its undertaking given to the court on 31st March 2021 that it would execute a deed of cancellation of the previous sale deed.
Justice Satish Chandra Sharma has given multiple notable judgments which helped India to uphold its legal and moral spirit and will continue in doing so.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at firstname.lastname@example.org