Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

Attempts By Khap Panchayats To Scuttle/Prevent Marriages “Illegal”In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that any attempt by Khap Panchayats or any other assembly to scuttle or prevent two consenting adults from marrying is absolutely “illegal”. Delivering a judgment in the PIL filed by NGO Shakti Vahini on the issue, a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud also laid down a slew of measures to protect inter-faith and inter-caste marriages generally objected to by the Khap Panchayats.Right To Choose Life Partner Is A Fundamental Right, Consent Of Family, Community, Clan Not Necessary For Marriage Between Two AdultsThe consent of the family or the community or the clan is not necessary once the two adult individuals agree to enter into a wedlock, said the three judge bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud while holding that any attempt by Khap Panchayats or any other assembly to scuttle or prevent two consenting adults from marrying is absolutely “illegal”.Judicial Review Is Possible Only If There Is Unreasonableness, Irrationality Or Arbitrariness, Bias And Mala Fides, Reiterates SC The Supreme Court, in Municipal Corporation, Ujjain vs. BVG India Limited, reiterated that unless the court concludes that the decision-making process or the decision taken by the authority bristles with mala fides, arbitrariness, or perversity, or that the authority has intended to favour someone, the constitutional court will not interfere with the decision-making process or the decision of administrative authorities, especially those relating to acceptance of tender and award of contract’Tenure Of Chairman & Members Of Arbitration Tribunals Can’t Be At The Pleasure Of Govt: SC Declares S.4(3)(b) Of BPWC Arbitration Tribunal Act Unconstitutional The Supreme Court, while holding Section 4(3) (b) of the Bihar Public Works Contracts Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008, unconstitutional, observed that a provision that the tenure of the chairman and other members of the Arbitration Tribunal at the pleasure of the government is inconsistent with the constitutional scheme.Stay In Civil/Criminal Proceedings Not To Be Granted Beyond Six Months; Further Extension Only By Speaking OrderIn a very significant judgment, the Supreme Court directed that in all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order such stay is extended.Limitation Period For Application For Setting Aside Arbitration Award Begins From The Date Of Signed Copy Of The Award Delivered To The Party Making ItThe Supreme Court, in Anilkumar Jinabhai Patel (D) v Pravinchandra Jinabhai Patel, reiterated that the limitation period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act would commence only from the date of the signed copy of the award delivered to the party making the application for setting it aside.UP Higher Judicial Service Promotees Can’t Be Given Promotion Without Suitability Test In a judgment rendered on Wednesday, the Supreme Court bench of Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Justice Rohinton Nariman asserted that promotees recruited to the UP Higher Judicial Services (HJS) in the year 2008/2009 are not entitled to seniority prior to their appointment on the ground that the requirement of suitability test was introduced for the first time in the year 2007 and they had a vested right to be promoted against the earlier vacancies without the suitability test.SC Asks Centre To Examine The Need For New Judicial Fora To Decongest SC&HCs, Central Selection Mechanism,Full Time Body For Appointment & Evaluation Of JudgesA two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the authorities consider the proposal for central selection mechanism for filling up vacancies in courts other than the Constitutional Courts and also to consider as to how to supplement inadequacies in the present system of appointment of judges to the Constitutional Courts at all levels.SC Directs 30% Hike In Basic Pay For Subordinate Judges Accepting Second National Judicial Pay Commission Suggestion The Supreme Court bench of Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Tuesday accepted the recommendation of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission for the Subordinate Judiciary of an interim relief of a 30% increase in basic pay to be paid to Judicial Officers of all categories.SC Repels Challenge Against Sec. 70 Of IT Act Giving Power To Govt To Declare Computer Resource As ‘Protected System’ The Supreme Court repelled challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 70 of the Information Technology Act 2000, which gives power to the government to declare any computer resource as ‘protected system’. The consequence of such a declaration is that only persons authorized by government will be able to ...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

Ashok K.M

Tags