Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
keyboard_arrow_down
Login
exit_to_app
Why Assange threatens the American dream?
access_time 2021-01-26T16:29:53+05:30
The big political stick called CBI
access_time 2021-01-26T13:39:50+05:30
Why the outcry after installing Apps?
access_time 2021-01-25T16:46:01+05:30
Two mind-sets: one here,  the other there
access_time 2021-01-20T13:57:46+05:30
DEEP READAll arrow_drop_down
How the nation treated the memories of Ambedkar
access_time 2021-01-26T12:02:34+05:30
Anti-Conversion Law: A law meant for abuse
access_time 2021-01-12T13:56:35+05:30
Syed Shahriyaar
access_time 2021-01-05T19:08:46+05:30
Reading A week in the life of Svitlana
access_time 2020-12-23T12:06:42+05:30
Hum Dekhenge- One year of Anti-CAA protests
access_time 2020-12-22T17:35:06+05:30
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightSC refers pleas...

SC refers pleas against judges appointment to larger bench

text_fields
bookmark_border
SC refers pleas against judges appointment to larger bench
cancel

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday referred to the constitution bench the challenge to the validity of the constitution amendment and enabling law to replace the collegium system for the appointment of judges to higher judiciary.

An apex court bench of Justice Anil R. Dave, Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice Madan B. Lokur said that since they have referred the matter to a larger bench, the question of interim relief too will be decided by it.

The National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014, was challenged in a batch of petitions including by the Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Association.

Besides contending that the NJAC route for the selection and appointment of judges infringed on the independence of judiciary, the petitioners challenging the NJAC Act, 2014, said it could not have been passed in August 2014 as there was no supporting provision in the constitution. It came into effect only after December 31 assent to the constitutional amendment by President Prabnab Mukherjee.

On the other hand, the government contested the maintainability of the petitions, saying that these were premature and academic as statutory provision to bring in the NJAC has not been notified and operationalised.

The government had contended that unless the NJAC was operationalised and someone's rights were affected, there was no cause of action to challenge their validity.

While the Supreme Court Advocate-on-Record Association, NGO Change India, Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), Bar Association of India and others had moved the court challenging the appointment of judges to higher judiciary through NJAC route, the Supreme Court Bar Association had come out in the favour of the replacing the collegium system of judges' selection by the NJAC.

Show Full Article
TAGS:
Next Story