Creamy Layer in SC/ST Quota: Supreme Court Seeks Centre, States’ Views, Says ‘Not Hearing on Merits Yet’

The Supreme Court of India has granted six weeks to the Centre and States to file responses on a plea seeking exclusion of the creamy layer from SC/ST reservations. The Court clarified that it is not examining the issue on merits and wants inputs from all stakeholders before proceeding further.

Should ‘Creamy Layer’ Apply to SC/ST Quota? Supreme Court Issues Notice on Major Reservation Challenge

The Supreme Court has agreed to examine whether the “creamy layer” principle should be implemented in SC and ST reservations. A PIL argues that allowing affluent SC/ST candidates to avail quota benefits violates equality and defeats the purpose of social justice.

Plea In Supreme Court: Frame Strict Rules to Stop “Bogus Political Parties” Misusing Democracy

A petition in the Supreme Court urges the Election Commission to regulate political parties, citing “bogus” outfits appointing criminals and misusing donations. The plea demands transparency, accountability, and stricter laws.

“Can We Stop a Convicted Person From Forming a Political Party?” Supreme Court Sparks Major Constitutional Debate

The Supreme Court questioned if a criminal conviction can automatically bar someone from forming a political party, calling it a key constitutional issue under Article 19. The case, based on a 2017 PIL, challenges loopholes allowing convicted leaders to still head parties.

Supreme Court Declines Plea to Transfer Waqf Act Case from Delhi HC: “Petitions Now Filed Only for Newspapers”

The Supreme Court rejected a request to shift the Waqf Act case from Delhi High Court, remarking, “Petitions are nowadays being filed only for the newspapers” and questioned the urgency behind rushing to court.

Samajwadi Party MP Iqra Choudhary Moves Supreme Court for Implementation of Places of Worship Act, 1991

NEW DELHI: Samajwadi Party leader and Member of Parliament, Iqra Choudhary, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court, urging the full implementation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This Act seeks to maintain the status quo of religious places as they were on August 15, 1947, and prohibits any legal proceedings that aim to alter the religious character of these places.

[Mandir-Masjid Disputes] Fresh Petitions Filed in Supreme Court to Seek Vacation of Stay on Places of Worship Case

New petitions have been filed challenging the Supreme Court’s December 12 interim order, which prohibits courts from action on worship-related disputes until February 17, 2025. Petitioners seek modification of this stay, contesting the constitutionality of the Places of Worship Act, with political support advocating for its enforcement amid ongoing public debate.

“Places of Worship Act Not Violate Any Fundamental Rights Under The Constitution”: RJD Member Manoj Kumar Jha Filed Intervention Petition Before Hearing In SC

RJD Member Manoj Kumar Jha filed an intervention petition in the Supreme Court, asserting that the Places of Worship Act, 1991, does not violate constitutional rights and is essential for preserving India’s secular values. The Act protects places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, amidst increasing sectarian tensions.

“Courts neither has the Wherewithal nor Expertise to Prepare a Uniform Banking Code for Foreign Exchange Transactions”: Delhi HC

Today(26th Sept),The Delhi High Court stated that it lacks the resources and expertise to create a uniform banking code for foreign exchange transactions aimed at curbing black money and benami dealings. It directed that the petition be treated as a representation to the Ministry of Finance, which will consult with the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Reserve Bank of India.

“Will Stop Ladki Bahin Scheme. You’ve Crores To Waste On Freebies, But No Money To Compensate a Person For Illegally Taken Land”: SC Warns Maha Govt.

The Supreme Court today issued a warning to the Maharashtra Government, threatening to halt welfare schemes if compensation is not paid to landowners. The court criticized the state’s budgetary allocation for schemes, demanding compensation for illegally taken land. The Chief Secretary may be summoned if steps are not taken by August 28. The court also considered a plea for regulation of political party election manifestos.