Today in Politics: Justice Gavai to take oath as 52nd CJI
Justice B.R. Gavai will be sworn in as the 52nd Chief Justice of India (CJI) on Wednesday, becoming the first Buddhist to head the country's judiciary.
President Droupadi Murmu will administer the oath of office to Justice Gavai, who succeeds outgoing CJI Sanjiv Khanna.
The appointment was made by President Murmu under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, and the Ministry of Law and Justice subsequently issued a notification confirming the decision. Justice Gavai, currently the senior most judge of the Supreme Court, was elevated to the apex court on May 24, 2019.
Over the past six years, Justice Gavai has been part of around 700 Benches and has adjudicated matters across a wide range of legal domains, including constitutional and administrative law, civil and criminal law, commercial disputes, arbitration, electricity, education, and environmental law. He has authored nearly 300 judgments, including those delivered by Constitution Benches, upholding the rule of law and protecting fundamental, human, and legal rights.
Justice Gavai was appointed as a permanent judge of the Bombay High Court on November 12, 2005. During his tenure, he presided over a variety of assignments at the Principal Bench in Mumbai and at the benches in Nagpur, Aurangabad, and Panaji.
SC may hear pleas against new EC appointment law
The Supreme Court on Wednesday may hear a batch of pleas challenging the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (EC) under the 2023 law.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjal Bhuyan fixed the date after advocate Prashant Bhushan urged the Bench to accord urgent hearing in the matter.
On February 17, the government appointed EC Gyanesh Kumar as the next CEC. Kumar is the first CEC to be appointed under the new law and his term would run till January 26, 2029, days before the EC is expected to announce the schedule of the next Lok Sabha election. Vivek Joshi, a 1989-batch Haryana-cadre IAS officer, was appointed as an election commissioner.
– With PTI inputs
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
'If there has been a crime, why wasn't it punished,' asks Jagdeep Dhankhar on Justice Yashwant Varma issue
Is a parliamentary motion to remove Justice Yashwant Varma the answer, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar asked a gathering of Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, in Chandigarh on Friday (June 6, 2025) adding that 'if there has been a crime, why wasn't it punished?' Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday (June 4, 2025) said the government would bring out a resolution in Parliament in the monsoon session for impeachment motion against Justice Varma. Justice Varma was subject of a probe by a Supreme Court-appointed panel after a fire incident at his Delhi residence led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of cash at the outhouse. Mr. Dhankhar said the government of the day was handicapped because of a three-decade-old judicial order that did not allow it to register a First Information Report (FIR) without permission from the judiciary. The Vice-President said, 'So I pose a question to myself, in deep pain, worried, concerned, in anguish — why was that permission not given? That was the minimum that could have been done on the earliest occasion.' He also questioned why even after the Supreme Court probe, Justice Varma has not been punished. 'I have raised the issue. Ultimately, if a motion is brought to remove a judge, is that the answer? If there has been a crime, a culpable act shaking the foundations of democracy — the rule of law, why wasn't it punished? We have lost more than three months, and the investigation has not even been initiated. Whenever you go to court, they ask why the FIR was delayed.' The permission should have been granted soon after the cash was discovered and if not then it should have come up at least when the Supreme Court-appointed panel filed its report considering the 'compulsive, expedient situation'. The cash haul, Mr. Dhankhar said, was 'obviously tainted, unaccounted, illegal and unexplained' and the system must move to find out 'whose money it is.' He further asked, 'Has the money influenced the judiciary in judicial work? All these issues are agitating not only the minds of lawyers but also people on the street. But let the lid be blown off the can of worms. Let these skeletons in the cupboards come out. Why was there no FIR? Why has there been no investigation at all?' The gap between 'may be true' and 'must be true', the Vice-President said, is very thin. 'But this thin distance has to be negotiated by evidence of unimpeachable veracity. So, I put innocence at a very high level. I am not aware of who is guilty. But one thing is for sure — a crime of great enormity, shaking the foundations of the judiciary and democracy, has taken place. I hope it will be addressed,' he said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Delhi HC grants relief to CLAT-PG candidates, asks to declare results soon
The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a "fine balance" between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium "appeared to be excessive and disproportionate" but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be "fanciful or imaginative", it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to "avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations". "It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it," the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a "consistent adjudication". The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
No official version of Bharat Mata portrait, says Prasad
Ministers in the Left Democratic Front government in Kerala on Friday made it clear that they were not in agreement with the use of the Bharat Mata portrait at the World Environment Day event at Raj Bhavan here as the picture was not authorised as the official version by the Constitution or the Indian government. Agriculture Minister P. Prasad, who boycotted the event at Raj Bhavan a day ago over the use of the portrait, said that those in constitutional offices cannot convert government programmes into political events. A similar view was expressed by General Education Minister V. Sivankutty, who said Raj Bhavan and the Governor were above politics and said Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar should withdraw from the stand taken by him. The Governor had on Thursday asserted that there would be no compromise on Bharat Mata. No Indian flag Mr. Prasad, while talking to a TV channel, said no Bharat Mata portrait has ever been acknowledged as the official or authorised version by the Constitution or any of the governments in power since independence. The portrait was not carrying the Indian flag, but that of a political organisation, and, therefore, it could not be honoured during a government event. The Governor was free to pay homage to the portrait at private events, but it cannot be done in State government programmes. 'We all have a political view, but those in constitutional positions have restrictions on how they express it,' he said adding that the government view was that such a stand ought not to have been taken by a constitutional establishment. He expressed the hope that it will be corrected by the persons concerned. 'It actually should not be repeated in our country. We cannot accept it in Kerala,' he added. The Minister questioned why the Governor was 'rigid' on the issue when none of the earlier Governors and not even the Presidents of the country have carried out such a practice in the past.
