+123 456 7890 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043

Vermont: Senator, bishop, faith leaders discuss economic justice

first_imgVermont: Senator, bishop, faith leaders discuss economic justice Seminary of the Southwest announces appointment of two new full time faculty members Seminary of the Southwest Tags Posted Jun 23, 2014 Comments are closed. Rector Tampa, FL Inaugural Diocesan Feast Day Celebrating Juneteenth San Francisco, CA (and livestream) June 19 @ 2 p.m. PT August 14, 2014 at 6:51 am I am not convinced that the efforts of our politicians and religious leaders to get us to covet our neighbors’ property have made us as morally superior as we like to think. There is an enormous ethical difference between giving to the poor and using the power of government to compel others to give to the poor. David S. Benedict says: June 24, 2014 at 5:15 pm As a fellow Episcopalian in Williamsburg, VA and member of the Greater Williamsburg Outreach Mission to the those citizens who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless, I hope Bishop Ely will take his thoughtful statement to the Council of Bishops of the Episcopal Church in American that all members of our denomination will engage the rest of the faith community via the National and World Council of Churches, and make this matter of income inequality a united push to move towards economic justice across all natiional boundaries. Curate Diocese of Nebraska Associate Rector Columbus, GA Terry Francis says: The Church Pension Fund Invests $20 Million in Impact Investment Fund Designed to Preserve Workforce Housing Communities Nationwide Church Pension Group Episcopal Charities of the Diocese of New York Hires Reverend Kevin W. VanHook, II as Executive Director Episcopal Charities of the Diocese of New York The Church Investment Group Commends the Taskforce on the Theology of Money on its report, The Theology of Money and Investing as Doing Theology Church Investment Group Family Ministry Coordinator Baton Rouge, LA Submit an Event Listing Press Release Service An Evening with Aliya Cycon Playing the Oud Lancaster, PA (and streaming online) July 3 @ 7 p.m. ET Rector Albany, NY June 25, 2014 at 12:52 am As someone who lived in Vermont when Sen. Sanders was mayor of Burlington and now lives in NJ in the Diocese of Newark, I will admit that I have never liked Sen. Sanders. As a retired member of the US armed forces and a political conservative, I detest Sanders’ socialism and his constant carping about the inequality of our economic system. For one thing, his senator’s salary of $174,000 per year places him in the top 5% of earners in America. Secondly and unlike most Americans, his career as a US Congressmen and Senator means he will have a guaranteed lifetime pension that equals his current salary. Who else in America has that? Very few these days.Senator Sanders and other statists of his ilk continue to rail against income equality when it is the very policies of an over-reaching federal government that has contributed to this state of affairs. Obama, Pelosi and Reid are all individually wealthy by anyone’s standards, yet few of them have run a business, made a payroll or created so much as a single job whereby another American can make a living. Sanders in his own way is the same. They believe they have the right to deny Americans basic individual liberties for the greater good and in the process confiscate our wealth via excessive taxation, over-regulation and the use of coercive force against people who dare to disagree with them.Sanders and statists like him believe they have a right to take by force (via government mandates, regulations and laws) from the productive people of America and convey the benefits of that productivity on those who have largely produced nothing. I categorically reject that method of thinking and will do all in my power to resist it. The people of the state of Vermont have collectively proven, as have the residents of the other New England and mid-Atlantic states that they are no longer a real part of the productive engine of America – they did so by electing Sanders & Leahey, Markey and Warren in MA, Reed in RI, Blumenthal in CT, Schumer and Gillibrand in NY, Menendez and Booker in NJ, and others of their re-distributionist ilk in Delaware, MD and even Virginia.Senator Sanders and the national Episcopal Church have also deliberately forgotten that without a system that creates wealth that there is no wealth for them to coercively redistribute and that is why those of us who oppose them and larger, more intrusive and coercive government speak out as vocally as we do.Income inequality has been part of man’s lot since the beginning of civilization. It is not the role of a representative, constitutional government to take from one party to bestow on another simply to curry favor with the latter and to create a permanent class of serfs, unable to provide for themselves.If there were ever a set of issues that would drive me out of the ECUSA, it is the social justice movement that is based in liberal orthodoxy and self-deception. Then again, if one listens to people like the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts-Schiori, people like me no longer belong in the Episcopal Church. She may have a point after all; over the last several years I am reminded of a comment made by life -long Episcopalian, the late Charlton Heston when asked why he left the Democrat Party and became a conservative. “I did not leave the Democrat Party, it left me.”I am sure many former Episcopalians feel the same way about the church they grew up in and sadly, felt compelled to leave. Assistant/Associate Rector Washington, DC An Evening with Presiding Bishop Curry and Iconographer Kelly Latimore Episcopal Migration Ministries via Zoom June 23 @ 6 p.m. ET Rector and Chaplain Eugene, OR Associate Rector for Family Ministries Anchorage, AK Virtual Celebration of the Jerusalem Princess Basma Center Zoom Conversation June 19 @ 12 p.m. ET Advocacy Peace & Justice, Kenneth Knapp says: Faith & Politics Ya no son extranjeros: Un diálogo acerca de inmigración Una conversación de Zoom June 22 @ 7 p.m. ET Director of Music Morristown, NJ Rector Collierville, TN New Berrigan Book With Episcopal Roots Cascade Books Cathedral Dean Boise, ID Assistant/Associate Rector Morristown, NJ Rector Martinsville, VA Assistant/Associate Priest Scottsdale, AZ Comments (4) Episcopal Migration Ministries’ Virtual Prayer Vigil for World Refugee Day Facebook Live Prayer Vigil June 20 @ 7 p.m. ET TryTank Experimental Lab and York St. John University of England Launch Survey to Study the Impact of Covid-19 on the Episcopal Church TryTank Experimental Lab July 1, 2014 at 1:08 pm I totally agree with my fellow vet Paul Connors. With each passing year TEC is looking more and more like just a wing of the DNC in its activities and its rhetoric. Economic inequality is just one of many examples. And our esteemed PB has shown time and again her contempt for conservative members of this denomination by hauling into court conservative parishes that chose to break away because most of the members of the congregation felt TEC had simply become too leftward-leaning. Her message to them was and still is, you can leave if you want but no way are you keeping the property. Time and again I have said and will continue to say, progressive/liberalism has become the unofficial sacrament of the Episcopal Church and sadly, it’s here to stay. Join the Episcopal Diocese of Texas in Celebrating the Pauli Murray Feast Online Worship Service June 27 Priest-in-Charge Lebanon, OH Youth Minister Lorton, VA Rector Smithfield, NC Rector Knoxville, TN Paul Connors says: Rector Pittsburgh, PA Priest Associate or Director of Adult Ministries Greenville, SC Submit a Press Release Featured Events Rector Washington, DC From left, Monsignor Roland Rivard, the Rev. Lynn Bujnak, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, Bishop Thomas Ely and Rabbi Joshua Chasan. Photo: Episcopal Diocese of Vermont[Episcopal Diocese of Vermont] On June 20, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) held a news conference with Vermont religious leaders to discuss the moral implications of extreme wealth and income inequality. Bishop Thomas Ely, Rabbi Joshua Chasan, the Rev. Lynn Bujnak, and Monsignor Roland Rivard were present, as well as several other Episcopal clergy and faith leaders.Bishop Ely’s participation in this news conference is in keeping with the resolution on the subject of economic justice and income inequality passed at The Episcopal Church in Vermont’s 2013 Diocesan Convention.Below is the transcript of Bishop Ely’s statement:Thank you Senator Sanders.Thank you for your advocacy on so many important issues and especially your leadership in the area of economic justice and income inequality. I am glad to add my voice to yours and these distinguished colleagues who provide important leadership and direction in our Vermont faith communities.The President has called income disparity “the defining challenge of our time.” He speaks an important truth to us. Economic justice and income inequality are indeed moral issues of immediate and urgent concern and present us with important choices about how we will live and how we will act.Many years ago Supreme Court Justice Brandies declared “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.” Evidence suggests that inequality is not only corroding our political system but eroding social cohesion as well.The systematic undermining of the middle class has had serious consequences for the preservation of families, health, education and employment and even greater consequences for those in the bottom 30%. Social unrest is a growing possibility.Our financial system has become deeply distorted: financial institutions that are “too big to fail,” investment instruments few can understand, and pervasive conflicts of interests that are threatening the ongoing ecological stability of our world all contribute to this reality.The suffering and overpowered majority will continue to lose the struggle for jobs, affordable housing, education, retirement security, and a sustainable environment if we keep silent. This situation cries out for us to open our eyes, ears, minds and hearts to this growing bitter reality. The excesses of the sin of avarice, of greed, along with the sin of pride, are at work in our midst and have the potential to destroy so much of what we cherish.These are critical ethical issues, touching on our obligations to each other as human beings, and therefore central to our faith traditions. We as faith community leaders have a responsibility to provide leadership on these moral issues, which have such a direct impact on so many of our fellow Vermonters.The people of the Episcopal Church in Vermont have called upon our Presiding Bishop, The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori to convene a nationwide interfaith coalition to provide moral leadership for the establishment of economic justice in our country. We have also adopted a statement on Economic Justice and Income Inequality prepared by our leadership Council (and available on our website). And, in a concrete effort to put our faith and conviction into action, our annual Convention urged all our congregations, as well as the bishop’s office, to pay all lay employees an hourly livable wage appropriate for the State of Vermont.For me, the call to engage this challenge is grounded in the words Jesus used to summarize the commandments that informed his faith, as well as the great Hebrew prophets before him, and which is expressed this way in the Gospel according to Matthew: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:36-40)Borrowing from the teaching of Archbishop Rowan Williams in his book Faith in the Marketplace, we are reminded that maintaining wealth at the cost of our neighbor’s disadvantage, or worse, is inhumane – what the other finds painful I should find painful too. True love of neighbor is the moral and ethical imperative that can lead us from greed to generosity, from economic disparity to economic justice.©The Right Reverend Thomas C. Ely, Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Vermont In-person Retreat: Thanksgiving Trinity Retreat Center (West Cornwall, CT) Nov. 24-28 Associate Priest for Pastoral Care New York, NY Episcopal Church releases new prayer book translations into Spanish and French, solicits feedback Episcopal Church Office of Public Affairs Canon for Family Ministry Jackson, MS Rector Belleville, IL Missioner for Disaster Resilience Sacramento, CA Director of Administration & Finance Atlanta, GA This Summer’s Anti-Racism Training Online Course (Diocese of New Jersey) June 18-July 16 Rector (FT or PT) Indian River, MI Remember Holy Land Christians on Jerusalem Sunday, June 20 American Friends of the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem Rector Hopkinsville, KY Rector/Priest in Charge (PT) Lisbon, ME Rector Shreveport, LA Curate (Associate & Priest-in-Charge) Traverse City, MI Rector Bath, NC Virtual Episcopal Latino Ministry Competency Course Online Course Aug. 9-13 Submit a Job Listing AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to PrintFriendlyPrintFriendlyShare to FacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitterShare to EmailEmailShare to MoreAddThis Featured Jobs & Calls Course Director Jerusalem, Israel Bishop Diocesan Springfield, ILlast_img read more

Read More »

Arrogation Of Unlimited Contempt Power By The Supreme Court- A Hornets’ Nest Stirred Up Again

first_imgColumnsArrogation Of Unlimited Contempt Power By The Supreme Court- A Hornets’ Nest Stirred Up Again Asim Pandya, Senior Advocate16 Sep 2020 1:09 AMShare This – xRecent decisions of the Supreme Court of India in Re: Vijay Kurle and Re: Prashant Bhushan have stirred up a Hornet’s nest again by holding that the Supreme Court of India has inherent jurisdiction in relation to contempt of court as recognized by Article 129 of the Constitution of India and therefore no law of Parliament can limit, regulate or control its powers. These decisions also…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?LoginRecent decisions of the Supreme Court of India in Re: Vijay Kurle and Re: Prashant Bhushan have stirred up a Hornet’s nest again by holding that the Supreme Court of India has inherent jurisdiction in relation to contempt of court as recognized by Article 129 of the Constitution of India and therefore no law of Parliament can limit, regulate or control its powers. These decisions also state that the Supreme Court is not bound by the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The aforesaid enunciation of law is based on a very old notion that the superior courts that were constituted as “Courts of Record” during the British rule possessed inherent jurisdiction to decide what is contempt of court, what procedure to be followed for deciding the guilt and what punishment to be imposed. That was the notion prevalent when there was hardly any codified law on contempt of court. One should constantly remember that nobody can claim to possess an unlimited power. Everyone including the Supreme Court of India is also bound by the Constitution and the law of the land. Assumption of an unlimited and unregulated power is antithesis to the rule of law and the constitutional ethos. Prior to the codification of the law of contempt of court in India the contempt jurisdiction was exercised the High Court by virtue of it being a superior court of record having an inherent contempt jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of India came into existence only under the Constitution of India. The Federal Court was not a very old institution as it was brought into existence by the GOI Act, 1935 from year 1937. The Federal Court functioned until it was replaced by the Supreme Court of India. Thus, exercise of inherent contempt jurisdiction by the Supreme Court has no sufficiently long historical sanction unlike the High Courts established during the British rule. Originally in the past the contempt power was wholly unregulated and considered arbitrary. What constituted contempt of court, what procedure to be followed and what punishment to be imposed was left to the judgment of an individual judge trying the contempt. The jurisdiction was so arbitrary that until recent times no appeal lay against the judgment given in exercise of contempt jurisdiction. It was for this reason Parliament had to intervene in relation to contempt jurisdiction by providing the maximum punishment for contempt of court and providing a fair procedure for the summary trial for contempt of court with a right to appeal. In India also the Parliament intervened by enacting the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 initially which was almost reproduction of The 1926 Act and having found it inadequate to meet the needs of the time, it enacted The Contempt of Courts Act,1971 to see that the power of contempt stands the test of it being non-arbitrary, fair, just, reasonable and constitutional. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is based on the recommendations made by the Sanyal Committee and the Joint Select Committee. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 touches broadly the following aspects of the contempt jurisdiction. It defines what is contempt of court. It prescribes the procedure to be followed for initiating and conducting contempt proceeding. It prescribes the maximum punishment of imprisonment and fine that can be imposed. It provides for the period of limitation for initiating contempt proceeding. It provides for appeal against an order passed in exercise of the contempt powers. Now it even provides that the “truth” can be pleaded as defense in contempt proceeding. Relevant extract from the report of the Sanyal Committee: In India the power to punish for contempt of court has been recognized to be there in all High Courts and the Supreme Court specifically in the Constitution of India itself. Therefore, no ordinary law made by Parliament can take away this power. Perhaps, by amending the Constitution only the power of contempt can be abrogated. The Sanyal Committee (Chapter III) examined the issue regarding the power of Parliament in respect of making a law on contempt of court in light of the provisions contained in the Constitution of India. The observations of the Committee are as under: “The question which arises out of various constitutional provisions is as to how far the legislature is competent to deal with the subject of contempt of courts and as to what are the limitation of the legislature in this matter. The question is of fundamental importance as there are some data indicating that in view of the constitutional provisions the legislature is not competent to define contempt in so far as the superior courts are concerned…In State v. Padmakant MalaviyaAIR 1954 All 523, Desai J observed that contempt was not defined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 not because it was difficult, or not necessary to define it but because the legislature had no power to define it, a court of record having exclusive power to define and determine what amounts to contempt. The doubt in regard to legislative competency seem to have arisen mainly by reason of the fact that the Constitution has by Article 129 and 215 expressly declared the Supreme Court and the High Courts to be courts of record possessing all the powers of such courts including the power to punish the contempt of themselves, while at the same time, enumerating without any qualifications contempt of the Supreme Court in Entry 77 of List I and contempt of courts other than the Supreme Court in Entry 14 of List III of the Seventh Schedule.” After taking note of the Constituent Assembly Debates the Sanyal Committee recorded: “..the elaborate phraseology of Articles 129 and 215 would reveal itself more as the consequence of a practical difficulty in using more concise and less misleading language to describe the powers of the courts rather than as an attempt to freeze for all time to come the substantive law of contempt. The wide and unqualified language of Entry 77 of List I and Entry 14 of List III of the seventh schedule shows that the legislature has full power to legislate with respect to contempt of court subject only to the qualification that the legislature cannot take away the power of the Supreme Court or the High Court to punish for contempt or vest that power in some other court, for example, a magistrate’s court. Further the provisions of the Article 142(2) to the effect that the Supreme Court shall have all and every power to make any order for the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself, subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament. ‘Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament’ clearly assumes that Parliament has full power to legislate in relation to contempt of the Supreme Court. In other words, even if Article 129 were interpreted as conferring on the Supreme Court the power to punish for contempt of itself, another Article, namely Article 142(2) expressly makes ‘all and every power’ of the court to make any order for punishment of any such contempt subject to any law made in this behalf by Parliament. Further legislation in relation to contempt, as contemplated and saved by Article 19(2), must necessarily be in relation to substantive law of contempt and such legislation would not be possible in relation to the Supreme Court and High Courts if Articles 129 and 215 were construed to prohibit it. It would therefore, seem to us to be sufficiently clear that having regard to the relevant provisions, Parliament has power to legislate in relation to the substantive law of contempt of the Supreme Court and High Court. In this conclusion, we are fortified by the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, which expanded the ambit of the authority of these superior courts and at the same time limited punishment which may be awarded by courts in contempt cases. Those provisions doubtless pertain to substantive aspect of the contempt law and were noticed by the Supreme Court in Sukhdev Singh’s case without any doubt being cast about their constitutional validity.” Finally, the Sanyal Committee concluded: “Having come to the conclusion that Parliament is competent to legislate in relation to contempt, the next question that arises is as to the limitations, if any, to which this power of Parliament is subject. The paramount limitation, in our opinion, is that the power of the Supreme Court and the High Court to punish for contempt having been recognized in express words, by the Articles of the Constitution, it cannot be abrogated, nullified, or transferred to some other body, save by an amendment of the Constitution. …. Our conclusion, therefore, is that Parliament is competent to legislate in relation to the law of contempt subject to only three limitations…. and there is no basis for the theory that a court of record has the sole and exclusive power to define and determine what amounts to contempt of its authority.” Parliament’s competence not doubted: In S.K. Sarkar Versus Vinay Chandra Mishra AIR 1981 SC 723 the Supreme Court said: “Articles 129 and 215 preserve all the powers of the Supreme Court and the High Court, respectively, as a Court of Record which include the power to punish the contempt of itself. There are no curbs on the power of the High Court to punish for contempt of itself except those contained in the Contempt of Courts Act. Articles 129 and 215 do not define as to what constitutes contempt of Court. Parliament has, by virtue of the Entries 77 and 14 in List I and List III respectively of the Seventh Schedule, power to define and limit the powers of the Courts in punishing contempt of Court and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto. Indeed, this is what is stated in the preamble of the Act of 1971.” Here also the court did not doubt the legislative competence of Parliament to enact law in respect of contempt of court. On the contrary it was said that Parliament has, by virtue of the Entries 77 and 14 in List I and List III respectively of the Seventh Schedule and Article 142 of the Constitution, power to define and limit the powers of the Courts in punishing contempt of Court and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto. In Delhi Judicial service Association’s case AIR 1991 SC 2176 slightly different observations were made in the background of a particular contention raised by the alleged contemnor. The court stated: “The power of the Supreme Court and the High Court being the Courts of Record as embodied under Articles 129 and 215 respectively cannot be restricted and trammeled by any ordinary legislation including the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. Their inherent power is elastic, unfettered and not subjected to any limit. The power conferred upon the Supreme Court and the High Court, being Courts of Record…and therefore the constitutionally vested right cannot be either abridged by any legislation or abrogated or cut down. The caution that has to be observed in exercising this inherent power by summary procedure is that the power should be used sparingly, that the procedure to be followed should be fair and that the contemnor should be made aware of the charge against him and given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself…Entry 77 of List I, Schedule 7 read with Article 246 confers power on the Parliament to enact law with respect to the Constitution, organization, jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court including the contempt of the Supreme Court. The Parliament is thus competent to enact a law relating to the powers of Supreme Court with regard to ‘contempt of itself’ such a law may prescribe procedure to be followed and it may also prescribe the maximum punishment which could be awarded and it may provide for appeal and for other matters. But the Central Legislature has no legislative competence to abridge or extinguish the jurisdiction or power conferred on the Supreme Court under Article 129 of the Constitution. The Parliament’s power to legislate in relation to law of contempt relating to Supreme Court is limited, therefore, the contempt of Courts Act does not impinge upon the Supreme Court’s power with regard to the contempt of sub-ordinate Courts under Article 129. There is no provision in Contempt of Courts Act 1971 curtailing the Supreme Court’s power with regard to contempt of subordinate Courts, Section 15 on the other hand expressly refers to the Supreme Court’s power for taking action for contempt of subordinate Courts.” It must be remembered that Delhi Judicial Service Association was a case where the core issue was whether the Supreme Court can directly take cognizance of contempt of any subordinate court and whether The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 makes any provision permitting the Supreme Court to take cognizance of contempt of any subordinate court directly. The Supreme Court did not find any restriction in the 1971 Act which prevented it taking suo motu cognizance of a contempt of any subordinate court. Thus, in the background of some ambiguity in relation to the power of taking cognizance of contempt of subordinate court by the Supreme Court it took recourse of its inherent powers under Article 129. The Supreme Court once again clarified the position of Parliament as regard its power to enact law relating to contempt in Pritampal v. High Court of M.P. AIR 1992 SC 904. The Court held: “The nature of Entry 77 of List I and Entry 14 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution demonstrates that the legislative power of Parliament and/or the State legislature extends to legislating with respect to the matter connected with contempt of the Supreme Court or the High Court, subject to however, to the qualification that such legislation cannot denude, abrogate or nullify the power of the Supreme Court to punish for contempt under Article 129 or vest that power in some other court.” Similarly, in Dr.L.P. Mishra v. State of UP AIR 1998 SC 3337 the Supreme Court said that inherent jurisdiction has to be exercised in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. In Supreme Court Bar Assn. v. Union of India AIR 1998 SC 1895 the Supreme Court expressed no final opinion on the question whether Parliament can limit or regulate contempt power of the Supreme Court since that issue strictly speaking did not arise for decision in that case. The question regarding the restriction or limitation on the extent of punishment, which the Supreme Court may award while exercising its contempt jurisdiction, it was observed, may be decided in a proper case, when so raised. Discordant notes struck: In T Sudhakar Prasad v. Govt. of AP (2001) 1 SCC 516 dated 13/12/2000 (refer to also I. Manilal Singh v. Dr. H. Borobabu Singh AIR 1994 SC 505) the following view was expressed by the Supreme Court. The court held: “These articles do not confer any new jurisdiction or status on the Supreme Court and the High Courts. They merely recognize a pre-existing situation that the Supreme Court and the High Courts are Courts of record and by virtue of being Courts of record have inherent jurisdiction to punish for contempt of themselves. Such inherent power to punish for contempt is summary. It is not governed or limited by any rules of procedure excepting the principles of natural justice. The jurisdiction contemplated by Articles 129 and 215 is inalienable. It cannot be taken away or whittled down by any legislative enactment subordinate to Constitution. The provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are in addition to and not in derogation of Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution. The provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be used for limiting or regulating the exercise of jurisdiction contemplated by the said two articles”. The aforesaid decision in T. Sudhakar Prasad and Manilal Singh’s cases do not lays down the law correctly and they have no value as precedents. Controversy conclusively settled: In fact, in the later decision in Pallav Sheth v. Custodian AIR 2001 SC 2763 dated 10/08/2001 the court directly and exhaustively examined the issue whether the law prescribing period of limitation for initiation of contempt proceeding could be said to abrogate constitutional power under Articles 129 and 215. Pallav Sheth’s decision is the case where the question left open vide SC Bar Association’s case (AIR 1998 SC 1895) was conclusively decided. The court held: “There can be no doubt that the Supreme Court and High Courts are Courts of Record and the Constitution has given them the powers to punish for contempt. This power cannot be abrogated or stultified. But if the power under Article 129 and Article 215 is absolute can there be any legislation indicating the manner and to the extent that the power can be exercised? If there is any provision of the law which stultifies or abrogates the power under Article 129 and/or Article 215 there can be little doubt that such law would not be regarded as having been validly enacted. However, a law providing for the quantum of punishment or what may or may not be regarded as acts of contempt or even providing for a period of limitation for initiating proceedings for contempt cannot be taken to be a provision which abrogates or stultifies the contempt jurisdiction under Article 129 or Article 215 of the Constitution. Courts have always frowned upon the grant or existence of absolute or unbridled power. Just as power or jurisdiction under Article 226 has to be exercised in accordance with law, if any, enacted, by the legislature it would stand to reason that the power under Article 129 and/or Article 215 should be exercised in consonance with the provisions of a validly enacted law. In case of apparent or likelihood of conflict the provisions should be construed harmoniously. It, therefore, follows that if Section 20 is so interpreted that it does not stultify the powers under Article 129 or Article 215 then, like other provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act relating to the extent of punishment which can be imposed a reasonable period of limitation can also be provided.” Resurrection of the controversy: Despite the above stated clear enunciation of law, strangely the Supreme Court inflicted punishment on the contemnor de hors the provisions of the Act in Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2006) 3 SCC 374 and while doing so it relied upon its inherent and constitutional jurisdiction under Article 129. The court said: “Parliament by virtue of Entry 77 List I is competent to enact law relating to the powers of the Supreme Court with regard to contempt of itself and such a law may prescribe the nature of punishment which may be imposed on a contemnor by virtue of the provisions of Article 129 read with Article 142(2) of the Constitution. Since, no such law has been enacted by Parliament, the nature of punishment prescribed under the Contempt of court Act,1971 may act as a guide for the Supreme Court but the extent of punishments prescribed under that Act can apply to the High Courts, because the 1971 Act ipso facto does not deal with the Contempt jurisdiction of the Supreme Court” Zahira was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay cost of Rs.50000 contrary to the provisions of the Contempt Act. In comparatively recent decision Rajeshwar Singh v. Subrata Roy Sahara AIR 2014 SC 476 the Supreme Court once again held that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 129 of the Constitution is independent of the Contempt of Courts Act and the powers conferred under Article 129 of the Constitution cannot be denuded, restricted or limited by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The court referred to its previous decision in Delhi Judicial Service Association’s case and approved the observations made therein. This judgment is per incurium since the Supreme Court has not taken note of the subsequent decision in Pallav Sheth’s case which has clearly answered this issue. In fact in Delhi Judicial Service Association’s case the Supreme Court did conclude that the Parliament is competent to enact a law relating to the powers of Supreme Court with regard to ‘contempt of itself’ such a law may prescribe procedure to be followed and it may also prescribe the maximum punishment which could be awarded and it may provide for appeal and for other matters. In a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Re Vijay Kurle decided on 27th April, 2020 in Suo-Motu Contempt petition (Criminal) No. 2 of 2019 it has been reiterated that “Parliament has not enacted any law dealing with the powers of the Supreme Court with regard to investigation and punishment for contempt of itself… Section 15 is not substantive provision conferring contempt jurisdiction and therefore is only a procedural section especially in so far as Suo-Motu contempts are concerned.” In Para 30 of the aforesaid decision, a three judges bench decision of the Supreme Court in Pallav Sheth Versus Custodian was perfunctorily dealt with and bypassed by stating: “this court in that case was only dealing with the question whether contempt can be initiated after the limitation prescribed in the Contempt of Courts Act has expired and the observation made therein have to be read in that context only.…. It, however, went on to hold that providing the question of punishment or a period of limitation would not mean that the powers of the court under Article 129 have been stultified or abrogated. We are not going into the correctness or otherwise of this judgment but it is clear that this judgment only dealt with the issue whether parliament could fix a period of limitation to initiate the proceedings under the Act. Without commenting one way or the other on Pallav Sheth’s case (Supra)it is clear that the same has not dealt with the power of this court to issue Suo-Motu notice of Contempt.” In Para 31 the Supreme Court said: “In view of the above discussion we are clearly of the view that the powers of the Supreme Court to initiate contempt are not in any manner limited by the provision of the Act.” Again the Supreme Court in Re Prashant Bhusan Cased (Suo- Motu Contempt Petition (Criminal) 1 of 2020) quoted extensively many paragraphs from the judgment in Re Vijay Kurle’scase to reject the preliminary objection raised by the advocate for the alleged contemnor regarding non-compliance of procedural safeguards provided in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for initiating contempt proceedings for criminal contempt. In the separate judgment imposing sentence on Prashant Bhusan the issue was again raised that there was no conflict between the constitutional jurisdiction under Articles 129 and 215 on one hand and the Contempt of Courts Act,1971 on other by drawing the attention of the court to the binding precedents in the case of Pallav Sheth Versus Custodian and Meheshwar Peri’s decision (2016) 14 SCC 25. However, the Supreme Court in Para 78 brushed aside this argument by saying “We find that this question has been dealt with in the convicting judgment and what is the procedure under Article 129 and 215 of the Constitution has been considered in Re Vijay Kurle’s and others (2020) SCC Online 407. We will not repeat then again as they are referred to in the convicting judgment.” Conclusion: The aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court has again confused the settled law vide Pallav Sheth Versus Custodian which has conclusively answered all issues regarding the scope and width of Article 129 and Article 215 of the Constitution of India. Judicial discipline required that two judges in Re: Vijay Kurle’s case ought to have followed three judges’ decision in Pallav Sheth Versus Custodian and ought to have refrained from discussing the larger issue whether parliament had enacted a law of Contempt for the Supreme Court. In fact, Pallav Sheth’s judgment Para 30 to 32 make it clear that the provision regarding the maximum punishment under Section 12 and the limitation under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act are applicable in the context of the powers of the Supreme Court under Article 129 and High Courts under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. Since it is a three judges bench judgment it is binding to the bench of a lesser strength. The decision of the Supreme Court in Re Vijay Kurle does not lay down the law correctly. On the same premise T. Sudhakar Prasad’s case and Zahira Sheikh’s case overlooks the aforementioned legal and constitutional aspects and the Sanyal Committee’s Report which deals with the issue specifically and which was the basis for enacting the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The decision in Delhi Judicial Service Association’s case if read as a whole and properly it also does not say that Parliament cannot prescribe maximum punishment and time limit in contempt cases. In Re: Prashant Bhushan’s case the bench consisted of three judges which followed two judges bench judgment in Re: Vijay Kurle’s case rather than following three judges bench judgment in Pallav Sheth’s case which is also inappropriate. As stated in the beginning of this article under our constitutional scheme nobody can arrogate to itself unlimited and untrammeled power or jurisdiction. If the Supreme Court or the High Court is trying to assert that it has unlimited jurisdiction in contempt matters and is not bound by the limits prescribed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, such an assumption will infringe the fundamental right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Such an arbitrary power has no place in our nation governed by the rule of law which is part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Such an assumption frustrates the very objects of the codification of law of contempt. Moreover, the subordinate courts are not invested with the contempt jurisdiction and hence the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 has been enacted for the purposes of regulation of the contempt powers of superior courts only since prior to the codification of the law the contempt power was considered to be unlimited, arbitrary and unregulated. Further, the statement of law recorded by the Supreme Court that no law has been made by Parliament in respect of contempt of the Supreme Court is not palatable. Parliament is not expected to enact a separate law only for contempt of Supreme Court. The 1971 Act is a composite legislation pertaining to high courts and the Supreme Court both. Section 15 and 19 of the 1971 Act specifically mentions the Supreme Court and prescribes the manner of taking cognizance and right to appeal.Views are personal only.(Author is a Senior Advocate at Gujarat High Court & Author of “Law of Contempt”) Next Storylast_img read more

Read More »

FlyQuest announce 5-hour ENERGY as foundational sponsor

first_imgFlyQuest Sports, an esports organisation owned by Fortress Investment Group co-founder and Milwaukee Bucks co-owner has announced its second deal this week. 5-hour ENERGY will join the organisation as the Official Energy Shot of FlyQuest.The deal will see 5-hour ENERGY feature prominently on jerseys as well as social media activations and exclusive streaming integrations. 5-hour ENERGY’s sponsorship will also see two original content series produced. The first is called the “myFlyQuest Challenge” which will show members off the League of Legends team engaging in challenges through Spring and Summer splits testing both physical and communication skills. The second will be called the “5-hour Extra Strength Moment of the Match” which will be a highlight reel of the weekend’s competition.It comeas as the second deal in a week, as earlier FlyQuest revealed SNICKERS would become the Official Chocolate Bar of the North American League of Legends Championship Series spot owner. “We are excited to welcome 5-hour ENERGY to the FlyFam as a Foundational Sponsor,” said CEO Ryan Edens. “5-hour ENERGY is no stranger to the space, and we worked closely with them to develop a sponsorship that melds their brand message with our fan first mentality.  Fans can expect impactful and entertaining content that showcases how 5-hour ENERGY can help them overcome challenges and get back to 100%.”“We are excited to extend 5-hour ENERGY’s reach in the esports community through FlyQuest and their passionate, growing fan base,” said 5-hour ENERGY’s Director of Communications, Melissa Skabich. “FlyQuest is an organization that shares our vision and desire to deliver quality content to the community, and we look forward to creating two new series together.”Esports Insider says: Another cool deal from FlyQuest as the NA LCS gets underway very shortly. SNICKERS and now 5-hour ENERGY makes them a fairly fun brand to follow if you’re that way inclined.last_img read more

Read More »

Mason City School Board approves pay for staff during canceled school days caused by COVID-19 emergency

first_imgMASON CITY — The Mason City School Board last night approved memorandums of understanding between the school district and the unions representing the district’s employees to continue receiving pay while classes are cancelled and to address making up cancelled days between March 16th and this week. Board president Jodi Draper thanked her board colleagues for approving the modifications in each union’s collective bargaining agreement. “I think that’s very important for the families and for our teachers, our staff and paraprofessionals. We care about them. We know they’d rather be in class working with our students instead of at home. I want to commend the board for that.“The board also discussed in a workshop session what the rest of the school year would look like in the district. Superintendent Dave Versteeg says since school has been cancelled until at least April 30th, the district has to decide on a plan to educate students by the end of this week. He says they hope to have a voluntary education plan in place in hopes of getting a credit-based plan in place by the start of May.   “We’re choosing the option of voluntary education at this point, with our  goal being by May 1st, we can be ready for some level of credit program at some grade levels when that time rolls around. We can change our plan anytime we’d like.” Staff will be working this week with the intent of providing voluntary learning opportunities starting next Monday.last_img read more

Read More »

HORSE OF THE YEAR CALIFORNIA CHROME TO WORK PRIOR TO SATURDAY’S FIRST RACE AT SANTA ANITA; SHERMAN TRAINEE TO DRILL SIX FURLONGS IN PREPARATION FOR GRADE II, 1 1/16 MILES SAN PASQUAL STAKES JAN. 9

first_imgARCADIA, Calif. (Dec. 31, 2015)–Reigning Horse of the Year California Chrome will work six furlongs prior to Saturday’s first race at Santa Anita, as he prepares for a much anticipated showdown with 2015 Santa Anita Derby winner, Dortmund. Trained by Art Sherman, California Chrome will be handled by regular rider Victor Espinoza immediately following public address announcements at approximately 12:05 p.m., PST.One of the greatest Cinderella stories in Thoroughbred history, California Chrome, a striking chestnut colt by Lucky Pulpit out of the Not For Love mare, Love the Chase, purloined victories in 2014’s Grade II San Felipe Stakes and Grade I Santa Anita Derby to triumphs in the both the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes.Idle since running second in the $10 million Dubai World Cup March 28, “Chrome” was subsequently sent by his owners to England and then to Arlington Park near Chicago prior to being vanned to Taylor Made Stallions in Kentucky for some much needed time off and an opportunity to regain a substantial amount of weight. He was returned to his home base with Sherman at Los Alamitos Race Course in Orange County on Oct. 13.In what shapes up as the first meeting between two Santa Anita Derby winners in nearly 50 years (1965 Santa Anita Derby winner Lucky Debonaire and ’64 winner, Hill Rise, ran 1-5 in the 1966 Santa Anita Handicap), California Chrome has had seven works at Los Alamitos for his return, while Dortmund, who is undefeated at Santa Anita in five starts, has worked twice for Bob Baffert following his rousing 4 ½ length win in Del Mar’s Grade III, 1 1/8 miles Native Diver Stakes on Nov. 28.Following his seven furlong move last Sunday in 1:25.40, Espinoza suggested to Sherman that his stable superstar be allowed to work in blinkers this Saturday at The Great Race Place.“He didn’t work in blinkers last Sunday, but he’ll have them on (this) Saturday,” said Espinoza this morning. “He worked good last Sunday. I guess without blinkers he’s not an excellent work horse, but even with small blinkers, you have to be careful because he will go a little fast.“He grew up a little since last March. His neck is thicker and he’s much sounder. The time off has helped him recover from minor issues he had with his body.”Santa Anita will present a nine-race card on Saturday, with admission gates opening at 10:30 a.m. First post time is at 12:30 p.m. WITH ESPINOZA UP, ‘CHROME’ SET FOR FINAL WORK IN ADVANCE OF SHOWDOWN WITH DORTMUNDlast_img read more

Read More »

Half-time: QPR 0 Huddersfield 0

first_imgAndy Johnson almost put QPR ahead and they hit the woodwork twice, while Huddersfield missed excellent chances to score during an end-to-end first half at Loftus Road.Rangers boss Harry Redknapp made a major tactical change, pairing strikers Charlie Austin and Johnson, whose header from Niko Kranjcar’s left-wing corner was cleared off the line by Adam Hammill.Without the injured Joey Barton, Redknapp opted for a ‘diamond’ midfield, with Karl Henry in front of the back four and Kranjcar supporting the two strikers.Rangers struggled early on and Daniel Ward fired over after being found by Adam Clayton, and then squandered a golden opportunity by dragging a shot wide having been set up by Oliver Norwood.Huddersfield continued to cause problems and keeper Rob Green uncomfortably pushed over Norwood’s free-kick before saving Nahki Wells’ header.And Rangers had another lucky escape when the unmarked Jonathan Hogg shot tamely at Green despite having plenty of time and space after collecting Ward’s pass.The home side have struggled but have at least been able to rely on Kranjcar’s set-piece deliveries, and another corner from the Croatian led to first Austin and then Henry heading against the bar.QPR: Green, Simpson, Dunne, Hill, Assou-Ekotto, O’Neil, Henry, Carroll, Kranjcar, Austin, Johnson. Subs: Murphy; Onuoha, Traore, Diakite, Phillips, Zamora, Wright-Phillips. Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebooklast_img read more

Read More »

Keeping Saturn Old

first_imgKeeping a planet like Saturn going for billions of years has been a problem lately, especially when evidences show that what we see today of its rings and moons could not have lasted that long.Ringside gambling:  The rings of Saturn are majestic, colorful, and young-looking.  Their ices are too clean, and the forces acting on them too pervasive, to have lasted 4.5 billion years.  The old idea that they formed along with Saturn has, therefore, fallen into disfavor.  Robin Canup came up with a “new alternative,” according to the BBC News: a body the size of giant moon Titan (larger than Mercury) floated within range of Saturn and dove in.    “Just how these icy rings came about has always been a mystery,” the BBC said.  Earlier theories envisioned an icy comet, not a minor planet, forming the rings, leading to its 90 to 95% icy composition.  To keep the rock out, Canup proposed that the impacting body’s surface ices got stripped off on the way in and became the rings, then the rocky part smacked into the planet.  Canup’s story requires a body 10 times the size of previously-supposed comets.  She even thinks there was enough material left over to form icy moons like Enceladus, Dione and Tethys.  Whether or not such an explanation is likely, Carl Murray thought it was “a clever way to explain the peculiarly icy nature of the rings.”Titan’s vanishing oceans:  An article on Science Daily was primarily devoted to allowing Akiva Bar-Nun of Tel Aviv University to say “I told you so” about Titan’s oily lakes and 6,000-foot mountains.  One of the things he had predicted in 1979, though, was that there would be enough hydrocarbons formed on the surface over its age to cover the large moon 43 meters deep.  Later estimates were around ten times that high.  Bodies of liquid the Cassini spacecraft actually found in 2005 are restricted to scattered lakes in the polar regions.    Bar-Nun agreed that the liquids accumulate from precipitation of compounds formed in the atmosphere by solar radiation.  He disagreed with astrobiologists and researchers like Sarah Horst (see 10/08/2010) who find Titan a tempting target in the search for life.  “The chemical processes on Titan are different than those on Earth because there is no water vapor in Titan’s air, leading to hydrocarbon-based lakes unlike those seen on our planet.  Because of this, the frequent claims that Titan could be a laboratory for the investigation of life’s emergence on Earth are unfounded, he says.”Enceladus: bubbly or wobbly?  The discovery in 2005 of active geysers at the south pole of little moon Enceladus “jolted many astronomers,” according to a story by Mike Wall on Space.com echoed on Live Science.  How could this “small, frozen and presumably dead moon” be “geologically active” after four and half billion years?  One “new way of thinking” that former Cassini Project Scientist Dennis Matson came up with to account for its “unique properties” is fizz.  A subsurface ocean picks up ions in the rock that bubble upward and explode out the south polar cracks.  According to his computer models, it doesn’t take much fizz to produce the effect.  Mike Wall got excited about this “Perrier ocean” model without asking too many questions, like how the ocean survived for billions of years in a moon just 500 miles across, why they erupt at the south pole, and why other moons don’t do this.  Matson admitted, “Until now, how you got so much heat out was a big, big problem.”    Some of the details of that big, big problem were stated more overtly in an article on PhysOrg, echoing a news feature from Jet Propulsion Laboratory, that took another “new way of thinking” to explain the puzzle.  No one expected little Enceladus to be “one of the most promising places in our solar system to look for extraterrestrial life” (because of its water); “Instead, it should have frozen solid billions of years ago.”  Whereas larger astrobiological targets like Mars (4,200 miles across) and Europa (2,000 miles across) “harbor hints” of subsurface water, Enceladus (500 miles across) “just doesn’t have the bulk needed for its interior to stay warm enough to maintain liquid water underground.”  Internal heating from radioactive decay is woefully inadequate: “in smaller moons like Enceladus, the cache of radioactive elements usually is not massive enough to produce significant heat for long, and the moon should have soon cooled and solidified.  So, unless another process within Enceladus somehow generated heat, any liquid formed by the melting of its interior would have frozen long ago.”    The JPL story calls for friction between the sides of subsurface cracks to keep the interior warm.  As Enceladus wobbles in its orbit due to a tiny bit of libration (non-uniform rotation) from its slightly-out-of-round shape, it may gain the added increment of tidal stress to cause the friction – perhaps up to five times as much, according to computer models.  The hypothesis was made by trying to match the computer model with known hot spots at the south pole.  They didn’t line up without adding libration.  Libration has not been observed, but if it occurs, must be less than 2%.  Terry Hurford, author of the model, believes that’s enough: “the extra heat makes it likely that Enceladus’ ocean could be long-lived, according to Hurford.”  The L-word life was not far behind: “This is significant in the search for life, because life requires a stable environment to develop.”    Similar questions arise, however, with the wobble model as with the bubble model.  Why does this happen only at Enceladus, and not nearby Mimas or Tethys?  What makes this unique to this one moon?  Don’t other moons librate?  Are all others perfect spheres?  Have they no tidal stresses?  Invoking ad hoc conditions after the fact is generally frowned upon in science.Another article on PhysOrg shows how Cassini scientist Paul Schenk (see his interesting blog with 3-D flyovers of planets and moons) has detected Enceladus “spray paint” on Mimas, Tethys, Dione and Rhea.  The JPL article contained this amazing factoid: “Scientists estimate from the Cassini data that the south polar heating is equivalent to a continuous release of about 13 billion watts of energy.” The Space.com article added that this energy is “five times more heat per unit area than flows through Earth’s geologic hot spot, Yellowstone National Park”. Photos.  A new clear picture of the geysers was posted Oct 6 at JPL.  The PhysOrg article included two Cassini photos; the first one, taken 11/21/2009, also at JPL, shows over 30 individual jets (see large at Planetary Photojournal).A reader calculated that Enceladus could power 2.3 cities the size of Las Vegas with 13 billion watts.  After all, Las Vegas is at the “south pole” of Nevada, a state about as big across as Enceladus.  Isn’t it wonderful that this little tiny moon has been putting out this power, and this water-ice paint, for four and a half billion years?  Science says so.  You must believe.(Visited 20 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Read More »

SA takes strides against rhino poaching

first_img23 January 2015The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) secured a conviction rate of 61% in criminal cases related to rhino poaching during the 2013/14 financial year, according to Environmental Affairs Minister Edna Molewa.Speaking on 22 January on measures being taken to combat rhino poaching in South Africa, Molewa said the number of arrested alleged poachers, couriers and syndicate members had risen from 343 in 2013 to 386 in 2014.South Africa is home to the largest population of rhino in the world. Last year, a total of 174 alleged rhino poachers were arrested in the Kruger National Park and 212 in the rest of the country.In December, 16 members of a rhino horn smuggling syndicate in Prague, Czech Republic, were arrested.Molewa said the Czech arrests were the successful outcome of cross-border co- operation between affected countries as well as transit and end user countries to tackle the illicit trade in rhino horn.“Despite the successes. illicit trade in rhino horn undermines our efforts. During 2014, 1 215 rhino were killed. This is a rise in the number of poached rhino from 1 004 in 2013.”In 2014, there was increased collaboration between provincial, national and international law-enforcement agencies, as well as the criminal justice system and prosecution service.“We are stepping up our use of technologically advanced methods to reinforce the protection of the rhino,” she said. “We have stepped up collation of proactive intelligence from multiple agencies working to combat rhino poaching.”The Department of Environmental Affairs was also working on improving crime scene management and to date, teams of officials had undergone intensive training.Translocation of rhinoIn addition, the department’s translocation programme was on-going and continued to be a success.In August, Molewa announced that rhinos would be translocated from areas in South Africa where they were under threat to more secure locations.“In the last quarter, 56 rhino have already been moved out of poaching hotspots and translocated from certain areas within the Kruger National Park to an Intensive Protection Zone (IPZ) as well as other more secure areas.”An IPZ is an area where additional resources are deployed to ensure better protection for the rhino.“On top of this, approximately 100 rhino have been translocated to neighbouring states during 2014, through both private partnerships and government initiatives.”She said translocation was aimed at creating rhino strongholds, areas where rhino could cost-effectively be protected while applying conservation husbandry to maximise the population.A number of the translocated animals had been collared so that their movements could be monitored. None of the animals moved to an IPZ had been poached.Legalising horn tradeMolewa said she had established a committee of inquiry to look into the issue of whether or not to legalise trade in rhino horn.In addition, 150 new and specially trained and equipped border guards were being deployed all along the border with Mozambique.South Africa and other countries affected by rhino poaching could not win the fight alone, she stressed. “I call on our partners and indeed on all South Africans to work with us in winning this fight, all the while working alongside communities in the management and ownership of wildlife. This is our very precious heritage.”Source: SANews.govlast_img read more

Read More »

Women in Agriculture event in March

first_imgShare Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Since 2007 the number of women in agriculture has increased by 7% in the United States. With this evolving statistic in the industry, many new avenues for our community and state have developed in order to, and this event provides an opportunity for our communities rising agriculture leaders.The agriculture community in Shelby County would like to support our women in agriculture by holding the fourth annual “Growing Women in Agriculture, an Empowerment Celebration” event on March 22, 2018, from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. The event will be held at St. Michael’s Hall, 33 Elm Street, in Fort Loramie. The evening is a unique blend of educational and fun agriculture information that specifically targets women in our community. The cost is $20 per person. A portion of the fee will support women in crisis. The registration deadline is March 9 with breakout sessions being filled on a first come first served basis as registrations are received.We are excited to have Carrie Mess, author of the agriculture blog “Dairy Carrie” be our keynote speaker this year. Carrie grew up in Madison, Wisconsin with no real ties to agriculture and then she met a guy…From there, her love affair with agriculture and her husband began. They now farm with his parents on their dairy farm outside of Madison and she began blogging to tell their story and agricultures story to all who will listen.In addition to Dairy Carrie, join us for sessions with Farm Credit Mid-America’s Bev Kremer. Bev is speaking about “what to bring to the table” when working on financing. We also, have Olive Wagar, of Organized by Olive,  who will help give us tips to organize our lives both at home and at work. Dr. Dee Jepson from Ohio State Univerity will be discussing assigning kids tasks on the farm, and how we incorporate them into our activities safely. Our final break out session is being taught by the Shelby Co. Sheriff’s Office on self-defense techniques. They will give tips and advice on being more aware of our surrounding and techniques to defend ourselves.For additional information or to register, please download the registration brochure at www.ofbf.org/counties/shelby or  call Jill Smith, Organization Director for Shelby County Farm Bureau at (877)775-7642 or Lynda Adams, Education Coordinator for Shelby Soil & Water Conservation District at (937) 492-6520, ext. 117 for information or to have a brochure mailed to you.last_img read more

Read More »

Manual J Doesn’t Tell You Equipment Capacity

first_imgHere’s a little conundrum for you. To get the right amount of heating and cooling to each room in your home, you need a load calculation. Rules of thumb don’t work. But if you do a load calculation, the result isn’t the size of air conditioner, heat pump, furnace, or boiler you need. It’s only the first step to sizing your system.Do you know why? Let’s take a look.Heating with combustionThis one’s easy. Let’s say the heating load for your home (in those annoying imperial units) is 50,000 BTU per hour. That means you have to install a furnace or boiler that can provide 50 kBTU/hr of heat to the home under design conditions. If the unit you install is 80% efficient, you need to install one that has a capacity of 62.5 kBTU/hr or higher. If you install a 96% efficient system, you need one with a capacity of 52 kBTU/hr.This brings up the issue of input versus output capacity. HVAC pros normally talk about combustion appliances in terms of input capacity. The load calculation tells you what your output capacity needs to be. RELATED ARTICLESManual J Load Calculations vs. Rules of ThumbHow to Tell If Your Air Conditioner Is OversizedAn AC Sizing Benchmark for High-Performance HomesSaving Energy With Manual J and Manual DHow to Perform a Heat-Loss Calculation — Part 1How to Perform a Heat-Loss Calculation — Part 2Calculating Cooling LoadsWhen Do I Need to Perform a Load Calculation?We Are the 99% — AND the 1%Air Conditioner Basics A 3-Ton Air Conditioner Will Rarely Give You 3 Tons of Cooling The nice thing about sizing combustion appliances is that the capacity generally doesn’t change with changing outdoor conditions. When you burn a therm of natural gas, a gallon of oil, or a pound of coal, the amount of heat given off depends only on the fuel, not what the outdoor temperature is.But there’s a little caveat to that rule. The output capacity of a combustion appliance does depend on elevation. If you’re burning natural gas in Aspen, Colorado, which is at 8,000 feet of elevation, your output capacity is lower because the density of air is lower.Heating with a heat pumpIf you’re going to use a heat pump, things are likewise pretty simple. Their performance rating to the standards of the Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) yields the heating capacity at outdoor temperatures of 47°F and 17°F. The indoor temperature for the rating is 70°F. So you can use those capacities or manufacturer’s data to find a heat pump that provides enough heat for your climate.But of course, it’s not really so simple. If you’re using a heat pump, there’s this thing called the balance point. As the outdoor temperature goes down, the heating capacity of an air-source heat pump goes down, too. At some point, the heating capacity is just equal to the heating load. That’s the balance point. Once the outdoor temperature goes below the balance point temperature, the heat pump can’t make as much heat as the house needs. Then you need some kind of supplemental heat.If you’re using electric resistance heat (also known as strip heat), your heating efficiency drops significantly once the strips turn on. As a result, you generally want to minimize the use of strip heat. To do that, you have to look at your cooling needs and make some compromises. Most homes do not have an even balance between heating and cooling loads so you’re either going to be oversized on cooling or have to use excess supplemental heat.Cooling with a heat pump or air conditionerIt’s the cooling side of things that motivated this article. Fifteen years ago, I didn’t understand this point and ended up undersizing some equipment as a result. Here’s why. The Manual J cooling load you calculate is how much cooling the house needs. Let’s say you need a total of two tons of cooling. You don’t just go to your HVAC supply house and say, “Give me your best two-ton air conditioner.”First, the total load isn’t the most important number. The total load is made up of two separate loads: sensible (temperature) and latent (humidity). The air conditioner you buy has to meet both separately.A common problem here is getting an air conditioner that meets the latent load but not the sensible. Why? Because if you go by the total load only, that’s where you end up. Here are some numbers from a job we did:Sensible load:   14,833 BTU/hrLatent load:        3,799 BTU/hrTotal load:         18,632 BTU/hrIf you go down to the supply house and ask for an air conditioner that has a total capacity of 18,632 BTU/hr, here’s what the specs might be:Sensible load:   13,042 BTU/hrLatent load:        5,590 BTU/hrTotal load:         18,632 BTU/hrThis air conditioner would be fine for the latent load but it would fall 12% short in meeting the sensible load at design conditions. The air conditioner we specified had a total load of 23,600 BTU/hr. It meets both the latent and sensible loads for this home as well as accounting for the other adjustments an HVAC designer needs to make.What adjustments would those be? Well, as it turns out, the conditions for testing and rating equipment aren’t the same as the design conditions. For air conditioners and heat pumps in cooling mode, the different design conditions can result in significant capacity differences.AHRI tests the outdoor condensing unit at 95°F. In Phoenix, the outdoor design temperature is 108°F, so it’s going to have a lower cooling capacity. Here in Atlanta, we get a little extra cooling capacity because our outdoor design temperature is 92°F, which is 3°F below the test temperature.Likewise, you have to adjust for the indoor conditions. For some reason, AHRI thinks people run their homes at 80°F and 51% relative humidity. It takes more sensible and latent capacity to hit the actual design conditions of 75°F and 50% RH. All this gets taken into account in ACCA’s Manual S equipment selection protocol.What a Manual J load calculation doesn’t tell youMy point here is simple. A Manual J load calculation doesn’t tell you what size heating or cooling system you need. It tells you how much heating and cooling your system needs to provide. It’s easy to confuse the two when you’re just learning about this, but it’s important to distinguish between load — how much heating and cooling the house needs — and capacity — how much heating and cooling the equipment provides. Allison Bailes of Decatur, Georgia, is a speaker, writer, building science consultant, and the author of the Energy Vanguard Blog. You can follow him on Twitter at @EnergyVanguard.last_img read more

Read More »