Sources also shared that two new members will join the Commission along with Justice Maheshwari. One of them is likely to be Prof D P Verma, who previously served as a member of the 22nd Law Commission.
NEW DELHI: The 23rd Law Commission of India, which has been without a chairperson for more than seven months, may finally get its new chief this week. As per reliable sources, retired Supreme Court judge Justice Dinesh Maheshwari is expected to be appointed as the next chairperson of the law panel.
ALSO READ: Legal Reforms | Odisha Government Notifies New 6-Member Law Commission Panel
Sources also shared that two new members will join the Commission along with Justice Maheshwari. One of them is likely to be Prof D P Verma, who previously served as a member of the 22nd Law Commission. A formal government notification regarding Justice Maheshwari’s appointment is expected very soon.
“A formal notification announcing Justice Maheshwari’s appointment is expected in a couple of days,” sources said.
The 23rd Law Commission was established on September 2, 2023, for a term of three years. According to the usual procedure, both sitting and retired judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts can be appointed as the chairperson or members of the Commission.
However, in most cases, this role is given to retired judges of the Supreme Court or former Chief Justices of High Courts.
One of the main responsibilities assigned to this Commission is to study whether a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) can be implemented in India.
Who is Justice Dinesh Maheshwari
Justice Maheshwari retired from the Supreme Court in May 2023. He began his journey in the judiciary as a judge in the Rajasthan High Court in September 2004. Later, he was transferred to the Allahabad High Court in 2014.
In February 2016, he was promoted as the Chief Justice of the Meghalaya High Court. After two years, he was transferred to the Karnataka High Court as its Chief Justice. In 2019, he was elevated to the Supreme Court of India.
ALSO READ: Law Commission Proposes Mandatory Registration of NRI-Indian Marriages
Justice Dinesh Maheshwari’s Notable Judgments
Upholding EWS Reservation – Janhit Abhiyan v Union of India
Justice Maheshwari authored the majority opinion that upheld the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, which introduced reservations for economically weaker sections (EWS) in education and public employment.
He observed that although the Supreme Court had earlier ruled that economic criteria alone cannot be the basis for granting reservations to SC/ST/OBC groups, a separate reservation scheme based on economic backwardness alone is constitutionally valid.
He wrote: “A constitutional scheme that distinctly recognises economic backwardness is valid.”
Justice Maheshwari also supported the exclusion of SC/ST/OBC persons from the EWS quota, stating that the purpose of any reservation scheme is inherently exclusionary, and as long as the scheme benefits its target group, others can be excluded.
He noted: “Reservations at its core were exclusionary; as long as the scheme grants benefits to the intended target group, other groups could be excluded.”
Expanded ED Powers – Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v Union of India
In this 2022 decision, Justice Maheshwari was part of a three-judge Bench alongside Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar. The Bench upheld the extensive powers of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), including the restrictive conditions for bail.
A partial review of this ruling is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
FCRA Amendment – Restrictions on NGOs
Justice Maheshwari also sat on the Bench led by Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, which in 2022 upheld the constitutional validity of the 2020 amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), 2010.
The amendments placed stringent limits on NGOs, including restrictions on who could receive foreign donations, how such funds could be used, and whether they could be transferred to other individuals or organisations.
The Court found the law to be reasonable and advised: “The Amendment places reasonable restrictions on NGOs.”
The judgment further suggested: “NGOs should instead solicit domestic philanthropy instead of relying on foreign funds.”
Zakia Jafri’s Petition in 2002 Gujarat Riots Case
Justice Maheshwari was part of the three-judge Bench that dismissed Zakia Jafri’s plea challenging the clean chit given by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) to 63 accused individuals in the 2002 Gujarat riots.
Notably, the judgment did not disclose which judge authored it, deviating from usual court practice.
2021: Suspension of 12 BJP MLAs – Illegal Suspension
In 2021, 12 BJP MLAs from Maharashtra challenged their suspension from the Legislative Assembly for allegedly abusing and threatening the Speaker.
Justice Maheshwari and the Bench ruled that the suspension was illegal, clarifying that legislative suspension powers are only to maintain immediate order, and cannot be punitive or prolonged.
The judgment explained that “suspension of MLAs was a ‘self-security’ power to maintain order in the House. It cannot be used to punish disorderly MLAs with suspensions exceeding the amount of time necessary to restore order in the House.”
2020: Sexual Harassment Case – Nisha Priya Bhatia v Union of India
In this landmark case, the Bench including Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice Maheshwari expanded the legal scope of workplace sexual harassment.
They awarded ₹1 lakh compensation to Ms. Nisha Priya Bhatia, a former RAW agent, after the Court found that the Union government had mishandled her complaint and caused humiliation by publicly questioning her mental health and compulsorily retiring her.
While the retirement decision was upheld, the Court acknowledged she faced:
“Prejudice, hostility, discriminatory attitude and humiliation”, which amounted to sexual harassment.
2020: Delay in Government Litigation – Madhya Pradesh v Bherulal
Justice Maheshwari, along with Justice S.K. Kaul, criticised the State of Madhya Pradesh for filing a Special Leave Petition with a 663-day delay. The Court dismissed the petition and fined the government ₹25,000, emphasising that bureaucratic inefficiency is not an excuse for wasting judicial time.
The Bench sent a strong signal: the government must be more accountable and disciplined in pursuing legal remedies.
Justice Maheshwari’s retirement in May 2023 reduced the Supreme Court’s strength to 33 judges, one short of its sanctioned strength of 34. With Justice M.R. Shah’s retirement scheduled for May 15, the total number of judges (including the Chief Justice) will further drop to 32.
According to officials in the Law Ministry, the new panel will be assigned the task of completing the draft on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) as part of its terms of reference.
“The new panel will be mandated with the completion of the draft UCC among other terms of reference,” sources said.
ALSO READ: The Law Commission of India recommends decentralizing powers for pandemic management
The earlier 22nd Law Commission, led by Justice Rituraj Awasthi, was working on preparing a comprehensive draft bill on UCC but could not finalize it during its tenure.
“The 22nd Law Commission hadn’t finalised its report on the UCC,” sources added.
The Law Commission has been functioning without a head since March 2024, when Justice Rituraj Awasthi stepped down as its chairperson after being appointed as a judicial member of the Lokpal.
“Implementation of a central UCC was one of the main poll planks of the BJP.”
The Commission under Justice Awasthi was actively working on the UCC draft bill since its formation in 2022, after a four-year gap in the existence of a law panel. The tenure of the 22nd Law Commission was extended till August 31, 2024, to allow more time for completing its tasks.
“The Justice Awasthi-led commission worked on formulating a comprehensive draft bill on UCC since it was constituted in 2022, after a gap of four years.”
“The panel’s tenure was later extended till August 31, 2024.”
