Latest news with #Gavai
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SC to T speaker: Decide pleas on BRS turncoat MLAs in 3 months
New Delhi: In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court on Thursday said to protect foundations of democracy, Parliament must take a call on the effectiveness of the anti-defection law mechanism, which has been virtually blunted due to the widely perceived partisanship of speakers, leading to delays in deciding disqualification petitions against political turncoats. Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice A G Masih gave this ruling while directing the Telangana assembly speaker to decide within three months the disqualification petitions filed against 10 BRS MLAs who defected to Congress after it formed govt in the state following the Nov 2023 elections. The verdict marks a departure from the restraint that courts have shown in setting deadlines for speakers and could well be a precedent in settling defection-related cases in the future. The CJI-led bench also directed the speaker not to allow the 10 MLAs, facing disqualification proceedings, to protract proceedings. "In the event, any of such MLAs attempt to protract the proceedings, the speaker would draw an adverse inference against him," the bench said. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad Constitutional courts have generally refrained from fastening speakers with a timeline to decide pending disqualification petitions. However, SC said since the Telangana speaker has delayed adjudication of the disqualification petitions by more than a year, it warranted issuance of directions to him. The bench was critical of the way the speaker issued notice on the disqualification petitions seven months after they were filed, and said such a delay breached the trust Parliament reposed in presiding officers to adjudicate defection cases fearlessly and expeditiously. In the 2023 elections to the 119-member assembly, Congress had won 64 seats, BRS 39, BJP eight, AIMM seven and CPI one. However, Congress's numbers rose after the defection of the10 BRS MLAs. Writing the 74-page judgment recording numerous instances of speakers' deliberate inaction in speedy adjudication of disqualification petitions against MLAs, CJI Gavai said, "It is for Parliament to consider whether the mechanism of entrusting speakers the important task of deciding the issue of disqualification on the ground of defection is serving the purpose of effectively combating political defections or not?" "If the very foundation of our democracy and the principles that sustain it are to be safeguarded, it will have to be examined whether the present mechanism is sufficient or is for Parliament to take a call on that," the CJI said. SC reiterated the settled law that speakers/chairman of assemblies, Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha function as tribunals while deciding disqualification petitions under the anti-defection law, and that their decisions can be scrutinised by the HCs and the apex court. CJI Gavai examined the purpose behind enactment of the anti-defection law in 1985 through a constitutional amendment and said the only purpose of entrusting the work of adjudicating the disqualification petitions to the speaker/chairman was to avoid dilly-dallying and resultant delay in the courts of law or the Election Commission's office. He said, "Parliament decided to entrust the important question of adjudication of disqualification petitions, on account of defection, to the speaker/chairman expecting him to decide them fearlessly and expeditiously." CJI Gavai and Justice Masih said, "With the experience of over 30 years of working of the 10th Schedule to the Constitution, the question that we will have to ask ourselves is as to whether the trust which the Parliament entrusted in the high office of the speaker or the chairman of avoiding delays in deciding the issue with regard to disqualification has been adhered to by the incumbents in the high office of speaker and the chairman or not?" Referring to a chain of cases under the anti-defection law marred by inordinate delay in adjudication by speakers across states, already frowned upon by SC in as many cases, the bench said, "We need not answer this question, since the facts of the various cases themselves provide the answer."
News18
15 hours ago
- Politics
- News18
Mediation holds power to improve access to justice: CJI Gavai
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New Delhi, Jul 31 (PTI) Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Thursday said mediation holds the power to improve access to justice by preventing conflicts from escalating into litigation. Speaking at the opening ceremony of the 6th International Virtual Summer School on Mediation, the CJI said the use of mediation reduces the burden on traditional courts. The CJI said consistent approach of using mediation as a method of dispute resolution can reduce litigation. He said mediation is not only a professional skill but a life skill as it teaches us to listen patiently, communicate emphatically and resolve differences constructively. CJI Gavai said Indian statutes and courts have long recognised the value of mediation as a means of delivering justice. Supreme Court Bar Association president Vikas Singh said there is a need to encourage mediation in the country. He said the Bar can play an important role in mediation. 'If more matters are not taken to meditation, then there will be a huge backlog of cases and pendency will increase," Singh said. The 6th International Summer School on Mediation is being hosted by NIVAARAN (Mediators of the Supreme Court of India) from July 31 to August 11 for 12 days. The event is being hosted with the support of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and Singapore International Mediation Centre. PTI PKS PKS KSS KSS (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: July 31, 2025, 19:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SC fixes Aug 19-Sep 20 hearing schedule for Presidential Reference; will hear preliminary objection of TN & Kerala on its maintainability
Supreme Court NEW DELHI: A five-judge constitution bench of the SC led by CJI B R Gavai on Tuesday fixed a nine-day schedule to deliberate on a Presidential Reference that has questioned the SC's power to fix timelines for the President and Governors on granting, refusing and withholding assent to Bills passed by Assemblies. The bench of CJI Gavai, and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar said the hearing would commence from Aug 19, when it will first hear senior advocates K K Venugopal and A M Singhvi on behalf of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, respectively, on the states' preliminary objections to maintainability of the Reference. It said those opposing the reference, represented by Kapil Sibal, Rakesh Dwivedi, Gopal Subramaniam, would be given four days – Aug 19, 20, 21 and 26 - to complete their arguments. Those supporting the Reference – attorney general R Venkataramani and solicitor general Tushar Mehta – would place their response to maintainability plea as well as the constitutional issues warranting the Reference on Aug 28, Sep 2, 3 and 9. It reserved Sep 10 for rejoinders by parties and clarified that under no circumstance would the schedule be breached and told lawyers to arrange time-schedule for their arguments through prior consultation. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like So Many Surprising Uses – Baking Soda Might Be The Only Thing You Need Read More Undo It appointed advocate Aman Mehta as the nodal counsel for those supporting Reference and Misha Rohatgi as one for opposers. 'The nodal counsel in consultation with lawyers shall arrange the timetable for the arguing counsel so that the hearing could be completed on Sep 10. The timetable will be followed scrupulously,' the CJI-led bench forewarned. TOI was first to report on May 15 about the President sending a Reference to the SC for its opinion on the contentious issue of judiciary stepping into the domain of the executive, especially when the Constitution gave no power to the SC to grant deemed assent on behalf of the Governor to Bills. Critical of the SC's Apr 8 judgment and use of its Article 142 powers to rule that the 10 Bills pending with the TN governor to be deemed to have been assented to, the President had said, 'The concept of a deemed assent of the President and the Governor is alien to the constitutional scheme and fundamentally circumscribes the powers of the President and the Governor'. The Reference had said Articles 200 and 201, applicable to Governors and the President respectively, 'does not stipulate any time frame or procedure' to be followed by them while considering grant or refusal of assent to a Bill passed by an Assembly. The Reference has sought the SC's opinion on 14 questions. Without any express provision in the Constitution, A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan on Apr 8 had set a three-month deadline for the Governor to either grant or return the Bill to the House. If the Bill is re-passed by the House and resent to him, then the governor must grant assent within a month, the SC had ruled. It had also fixed a three-month deadline for the President to decide whether to grant or refuse assent to a Bill.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Supreme Court blocks Calcutta High Court order staying new OBC list in Bengal
The Supreme Court on Monday temporarily blocked a Calcutta High Court order that had put a stay on the implementation of the TMC-led West Bengal government's new list of Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Calling it "surprising" and seemingly "erroneous", a bench headed by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai urged the Chief Justice of the high court to place the dispute before a bench different from the one that had ordered the stay. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Public Policy Healthcare Leadership Others CXO Digital Marketing PGDM MCA healthcare Cybersecurity Artificial Intelligence Finance Design Thinking Degree Operations Management Data Analytics Data Science Project Management Data Science others Management Product Management Technology MBA Skills you'll gain: Duration: 12 Months IIM Calcutta Executive Programme in Public Policy and Management Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Economics for Public Policy Making Quantitative Techniques Public & Project Finance Law, Health & Urban Development Policy Duration: 12 Months IIM Kozhikode Professional Certificate Programme in Public Policy Management Starts on Mar 3, 2024 Get Details The SC was hearing a plea by the Bengal government challenging the high court's order, which in June stayed notifications that reclassified OBC categories, and introduced changes in reservation quotas and new procedures for issuing caste certificates. The top court also asked the high court to take a final decision in a time-bound manner. "This is surprising. How can the high court stay? Reservation is a part of the functions of the will request the Chief Justice to place it before some other bench," Chief Justice Gavai, speaking for the bench, said. The bench said prima facie the high court's stay order appears to be "erroneous". "The (State Backward classes) Commission has followed some methodology (before proposing changes to the OBC list). Whether it is correct or not correct, let the high court see. Prima facie, the (high court's stay) order is completely erroneous," the CJI observed. "We will request the high court to do it (decide on the matter) in six weeks. We can request the Chief Justice (of the high court) to constitute a special bench." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Colombia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You) Container House | Search ads Search Now Undo
Scroll.in
4 days ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
Supreme Court stays Calcutta HC order blocking new OBC list in West Bengal
The Supreme Court on Monday stayed a Calcutta High Court order blocking the implementation of a West Bengal government notification classifying 140 communities as Other Backward Classes, verbally observing that it seemed to be 'prima facie erroneous', Live Law reported. A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria expressed surprise at the High Court's reasoning that only the legislature could approve the OBC list, and not the executive. 'How can the High Court stay like this?' Live Law quoted the Supreme Court as saying. 'Reservation is part of the executive functions. This is the settled law... Executive instructions are enough for providing reservations and legislation is not necessary.' The matter pertains to a notification issued by the West Bengal government earlier in June that added 76 sub-castes to the OBC category, taking the total number of communities in the grouping to 140. Out of these, 80 communities are from among Muslims, while 60 are non-Muslims, The Indian Express reported. Muslims comprise 57.1% of the population included in the OBC category. The state government's previous list of OBCs had 113 sub-groups, of which 77 were Muslims and 36 non-Muslims. However, the High Court had in May 2024 struck down the list, and had reduced OBC reservations from 17% to 7%. The new list would allow the state government to restore OBC reservations to 17%. The High Court's May 2024 decision was expected to affect nearly five lakh certificates. The state government's challenge to the verdict was also pending before the Supreme Court. On June 17, the High Court stayed the implementation of the new list and told the state government not to take steps based on it till July 31, when the case will be heard next. At the hearing on Monday, Gavai also disagreed with the High Court's observation that the state should have placed the reports and bills before the legislature for amendments and introductions to the 2012 Act's schedule. Advocate Ranjit Kumar, representing the respondents, told the bench that the list had to be approved by the legislature as per the law enacted by the state government. Advocate Guru Krishnakumar, representing the other respondents, also claimed that the list had been prepared without any data, Live Law reported. Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the West Bengal government, said the new list was based on a fresh survey and report by the State Backward Classes Commission. Sibal also argued that even the High Court had not held that the commission failed to conduct the exercise. Gavai then told the respondents that the bench could ask the High Court to form a different bench to hear the matter. 'If you are willing, we will direct the HC to hear the matter in stipulated timeline, till then status quo will maintain,' Live Law quoted the Supreme Court said. 'We will ask the chief justice to constitute another bench to hear.'
