Petitions Challenging Special Intensive Revision: Live Updates From Supreme Court

CJI : if 327 law making power can curtial or restrict the contours of 324 ...

Singhvi: parliament is also the custodian of our rights

Singhvi: the whole purpose of 327 was to allow the parliament to occupy the field on the nitigrity of the rolls

CJI: going by this , we have to accept that constitutional power is limited by the statutory means

Singhvi: the power they have relied upon is 324, 324 is trumped by the law made in 327

Singhvi: I will check the citizenship based on the 11 documents, which itself is not a form of the rules or statutory law

Singhvi: jurisdiction is decided by bluntness....it says that all the people of Bihar are presumptuous, temporary till I confirm that you are in the list, you confirm it by the list of documents, if you donot, then good bye

Singhvi: 324 read with 327, under 327 the ROPA is the law 

Singhvi: two radical pecularities - (1) it is state wise, most populous states; (2) there is no individuation of any kind for any constituency or part of it ; (3) you donot follow the form made under 21, to have an individual exercise; (4) this is accompanied by virtually a clearly declaration that the SIR is to first say that we have an old list- but there is no old list

Singhvi: an SIR is a revision of rolls on an individuated/ bilateral method on a limited constituency, there no power en mass

Singhvi: this is lack of jurisdiction I am arguing, this is an illusion of grandeur 

CJI: going by your argument, the ECI will never have the power to do the exercise ...it is not a routine/ daily update...if any process is transparent, it will be adopted by the ECI

Singhvi: if you assume that you have en mass power, then there should be all India SIR