UOI notifies appointment of three new judges to SC; strength rises to 34
NEW DELHI: The Centre on Thursday notified the elevation of three new judges to the Supreme Court following the President's assent to the collegium's recommendations.
The three new judges who are elevated to the top court are; Justices V. Anjaria, Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka, (ii) Vijay Bishnoi, Chief Justice, High Court of Gauhati and (iii) A.S. Chandurkar, Judge, High Court of Bombay.
These three new judges are expected to be sworn in by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai on Friday morning, as per sources. With the elevation of these three new judges in the top court, the actual number of judges rises to 34, which is also the sanctioned capacity of the top court.
Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Law and Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Ram Meghwal, talking to X (Formerly known as Twitter), shared the news.
"In exercise of the powers conferred by the Constitution of India, the President, after consultation with Chief Justice of India, is pleased to appoint S/Shri Justices (i) N.V. Anjaria, Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka, (ii) Vijay Bishnoi, Chief Justice, High Court of Gauhati and (iii) A.S. Chandurkar, Judge, High Court of Bombay as Judges of the Supreme Court of India," Meghwal posted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
41 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
J&K LG Manoj Sinha sacks three government employees for alleged anti-national activities
The official order stated that the Lieutenant Governor is satisfied under sub-clause (c) of the proviso to clause (2) of Article 311 of the Constitution of India that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold an inquiry and dismissed the trio from services with immediate effect. The Lt Governor has so far sacked over 70 government employees in J&K for their alleged anti-national activities by invoking Article 311 of Constitution of India. Under the proviso (C) of Article 311(2), the government is empowered to terminate an employee without recourse to the normal procedure if it is satisfied that his/her retention in public service is prejudicial to the security of the state. After the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A and bifurcation of J&K state into two Union Territories by the centre on August 5, 2109, the J&K administration has gone tough against its employees in the Union Territory.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
J&K LG Manoj Sinha sacks 3 govt employees, including police constable, allegedly working for terrorist groups
J&K LG Manoj Sinha (ANI/File photo) NEW DELHI: Jammu and Kashmir lieutenant governor Manoj Sinha on Tuesday sacked three government employees, including a police constable, who were allegedly working for terrorist groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul-Mujahideen. The accused have been identified as Malik Ishfaq Naseer, the police constable; Ajaz Ahmed, a teacher in the school education department; and Waseem Ahmad Khan, a junior assistant in Government Medical College, Srinagar. — ANI (@ANI) The three are being dismissed with immediate effect, the General Administration Department of the Jammu and Kashmir government said. Between August 2020, when he took office, and 2024, Sinha terminated more than 70 overground workers/terror associates from government jobs under the Constitution of India. The fresh dismissals, meanwhile, come more than a month after the devastating Pahalgam terrorist attack in the Union territory. On April 22, Pakistan-backed terrorists killed 26 men, including 25 tourists and a local in Pahalgam's Baisaran valley. India responded with Operation Sindoor, under which it hit terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, in the early hours of May 7. This triggered a military confrontation between the nuclear-armed rivals. On May 10, Islamabad reached out to New Delhi requesting cessation of hostilities, resulting in a ceasefire being announced. (With ANI inputs)
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
‘Thug Life' controversy: When C. Rajagopalchari had apologised for saying Kannada evolved from Tamil, why can't Kamal Haasan, asks Karnataka High Court
The High Court of Karnataka on Tuesday (June 3, 2025) gave time till 2.30 p.m. to actor Kamal Haasan asking whether he wants to apologise for his statement that 'Kannada is born out of Tamil' while pointing out that Governor-General of India C. Rajagopalachari had apologised for making a similar statement in the 1950s. When persons like Rajagopalacharari can apologise, why can't Kamala Haasan, the Court asked the advocate representing Raajkamal Films International, which has sought police protection in Karnataka for the smooth release of Mr. Haasan's Tamil film Thug Life as the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce and various pro-Kannada organisations have opposed its release in Karnataka till the actor isssues an apology. Situation of unrest Justice M. Nagaprasanna posed this question to Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa whilewhile asking if it wasn't Mr. Haasan who had created a situation of disharmony and unrest in Karnataka with his statement. Mr. Haasan is one of the directors of the petitioner-company. The petitioner-company was represented in the court by V. Narayana, another director. 'You may be Kamal Haasan... but any citizen has no right to hurt sentiments of masses. There are three things people are very emotional to, that is Nela, Jala and Bhashe, (land, water and language)... All these three things are important to any citizens. You know division of this country is on linguistic lines. The states are formed on linguistic lines. So you [Mr. Haasan] know importance of language,' the Court observed orally. 'Is Mr. Haasan a historian?' The Court further observed 'a public figure like Mr. Haasan makes a public statement on public forum that a language is born out of another a language when no language can be born out of any other language... Where is the material to support it. And what has happened because of that statement is unrest, disharmony.... What did people of Karnataka ask? An apology. Now you have come up before the court seeking police protection for the circumstance created by you. Have people of Karnataka created this circumstance?' When Court asked the advocate whether Mr. Haasan was a historian, the advocate said that that the actor had already clarified that he was not a historian and that his statement was taken out of context. To this, the Court asked on what basis Mr. Haasan had made the controversial statement . Protection on commercial interest Justice Nagaprasanna pointed out to Mr. Haasan's advocate that Mr. Rajagopalachari, in response to a letter written by Kannada writers, had sent an apology in writing for making a statement that Kannada had evolved out of Tamil. 'One apology [by Mr. Haasan] would have solved everything,' the Court said while pointing out that Mr. Haasan is before this Court to protect his commercial interest.
