Constitution Bench Judgments Of Justice DY Chandrachud

The Chief Justice of India Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud was elevated as a judge of the Supreme Court on May 13, 2016, and continued until November 7, 2022. He became the 50th CJI on November 8, 2022, and will leave the office on November 10, 2024. During his tenure as a judge and as CJI, Chandrachud has been involved in more than 700 judgments including constitution bench judgments, many of which he has authored, dissented and concurred with.As a CJI, he was a part of 18 Constitution bench judgments. He was also a part of the bench set to hear a challenge to the 104th Amendment Act 2019, which extended reservations provided for Scheduled Castes(SCs) and Scheduled Tribes(STs) communities in Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies by another 10 years [Ashok Kumar Jail v. UOI]. A bench headed by CJI, comprising Justices M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha was to hear the case from November 1st, 2022 onwards. But the hearing never began.The majority of the Constitution bench judgments were given in 2024. YearNo. of Constitution Bench judgments as CJIAuthored/Dissented/Concurred2022020236 (all five judge bench)Authored 5 majority judgment, 1 minority judgment202412 (6 five judges bench, 3 seven judges bench, 3 nine judges bench)Authored 7 majority judgments, 2 concurring1. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi vs Union Of India (May 11, 2023): The Supreme Court held that the National Capital Territory of Delhi has legislative and executive power over administrative services in the National Capital, excluding matters relating to public order, police, and land. The Lieutenant Governor shall be bound by the Delhi government's decision over services, apart from public order, police, and land.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud [authored], Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha2. Subhash Desai vs Principal Secretary, Governor Of Maharashtra (May 11, 2023): In the matter pertaining to the Shiv Sena rift, the Supreme Court Constitution bench held that it cannot order the restoration of the Uddhav Thackeray government as he resigned without facing floor test. Since Thackeray voluntarily resigned, the Court held that the Governor was right in inviting Ekanth Shinde from the government with the support of the BJP. "Had Mr. Thackeray refrained from resigning from the post of the Chief Minister, this court could have considered the grant of the remedy of reinstating the government headed by him", the Court held while observing that it cannot quash a resignation which was voluntarily tendered.The Court doubted the correctness of the law laid down in Nabam Rebia & Bamang Felix v. Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, which states that a Speaker will be disabled from initiating disqualification proceedings when a notice seeking their removal is pending. Since this was pronounced by a 5-judge bench, its reconsideration was pending before a bench headed by CJI, comprising Sanjay Kishan Kaul [retired since then], Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, Manoj Misra, Surya Kant, and J.B. Pardiwala. This bench will have to be reconstituted by incoming CJI Sanjiv Khanna.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud [authored], Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha3. Supriyo v. Union of India (October 17, 2023): The Supreme Court refused to grant legal recognition for queer marriages in India saying that it is a matter for the legislature to decide. However, all the judges on the bench agreed that the Union of India, as per its earlier statement, shall constitute a committee to examine the rights and entitlements of persons in queer union, without legal recognition of their relationship as a "marriage".Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud [minority judgment], Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul [minority judgment], S Ravindra Bhat [majority judgment], Hima Kohli, and PS Narasimha [concurred with majority]4. Cox and Kings Ltd v. SAP India Pvt Ltd (December 6, 2023): The Supreme Court held that an arbitration agreement can bind non-signatories as per the "group of companies" doctrine. "The 'group of companies' doctrine must be retained in the Indian arbitration jurisprudence considering its utility in determining the intention of the parties in the context of complex transactions involving multiple parties and multiple agreements," the Court observed.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud [authored majority judgment], Justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha [concurring judgment], JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra5. In Re Article 370 of the Constitution of India (December 11, 2023): The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Union Government's 2019 decision to repeal the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) under Article 370 of the Constitution. The Court held that the State of J&K had no internal sovereignty and the concurrence of the State Government was not required to apply the Indian Constitution to the State of J&K. It was held that Article 370 was a temporary provision.Bench: CJI DY Chandrachud [authored majority judgment], Justices Sanjay...

Constitution Bench Judgments Of Justice DY Chandrachud

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Constitution Bench Judgments Of Justice DY Chandrachud

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers