The Supreme Court’s seven-judge Bench has closed the legislative privileges reference arising from the 2003 N. Ravi case as infructuous, since the Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution was withdrawn in 2004, leaving the questions of law open.
The Supreme Court has indicated that it may close the seven-judge reference on legislative privileges, after it was told that the 2003 Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution at its root was withdrawn in 2004, with the Chief Justice of India saying the Court will not indulge in a mere academic exercise. New Delhi: The Supreme Court […]
Digital news outlet The News Minute and its Editor-in-Chief Dhanya Rajendran have asked the Supreme Court to let them intervene in the seven-judge Bench reference on the scope of legislative privileges under Article 194(3), arguing that breach-of-privilege proceedings against journalists would have a chilling effect on press freedom, ahead of the hearing from October 6.
Senior journalist Ajit Anjum has sought to intervene in the seven-judge Bench reference on legislative privileges, arguing through AoR Neha Rathi that privileges under Articles 105 and 194 are functional, must be read harmoniously with fundamental rights, and that standards are needed on when fair criticism of legislative proceedings may breach privilege; the Bench begins hearing on October 6.
Journalist Seema Chishti, Editor at The Wire, has sought to intervene in N. Ravi v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, Chennai, the seven-judge Constitution Bench reference on whether legislative privileges under Article 194(3) can override free speech under Article 19(1)(a), listed for hearing from October 6, arguing that privileges are not absolute.
![[BREAKING] "Statutory Creation Doesn't Nullify Minority Status Of AMU': Supreme Court](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/AMU.jpeg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court will announce its judgment on November 8 about Aligarh Muslim University’s minority status. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that questioning this status may threaten India’s secular nature. He emphasized that AMU’s administration does not require a majority of Muslims or Christians to retain its minority classification, highlighting historical and legal context.
The Supreme Court, today (24th Sept) led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, will review petitions on Sept 24 concerning sub-classification within Scheduled Castes for reservation benefits. The Court had previously ruled that states can implement such classifications based on data demonstrating backwardness. This decision overturned a past ruling affirming SCs as a homogeneous class.
The Supreme Court of India today rejected a PIL seeking to declare the caste system unconstitutional. Chief Justice Chandrachud stated that the Constitution acknowledges Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes, dismissing the plea. Additionally, a recent landmark decision revised the framework for SC and ST reservations, allowing states to create sub-classifications within these groups.
A seven-judge Constitution Bench will announce a verdict on sub-classification of Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) tomorrow. This ruling has major implications for benefits and reservations among these groups. The bench reviewed 23 petitions, including a challenge by the Punjab government, and revisited the 2004 E V Chinnaiah judgment.
![[Breaking] Supreme Court Strikes Down Haryana's 5-Marks Reservation in Employment Exams](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/image-16-1.png?resize=447%2C309&ssl=1)
Today,18th April,The Supreme Court postponed its ruling on industrial alcohol regulation, causing uncertainty in the industry. The decision revolves around the overlapping powers of the Centre and states. The nine-judge bench is reviewing the matter, which stems from conflicting interpretations of legislative competence. The final judgment’s implications for the industry remain pending.