Demonitisation, EWS Quota, SEBC Reservation For Muslims, Jallikattu & More : Summary Of 25 Constitution Bench Matters To Be Listed From August 29

As per the notice issued on Wednesday, 25 Constitution Bench matters which are pending before 5-Judge will be listed from 29 August 2022. Notably, the matters are not listed for substantive hearing but for directions related to the completion of filings, indication of tentative time to be taken by lawyers for arguments etc. Here is the summary of those 5-judge bench matters: Case Title: State of A.P. & Ors. Vs. B. Archana Reddy & Ors. with 18 connected matters - SEBC quota for Muslims in AP Case No. C.A. No.7513/2005 The Apex Court will consider the challenge against the five-Judge Bench decision of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which by four different opinions, has declared the "Andhra Pradesh Reservation of Seats in the Educational Institutions and of appointments/posts in the Public Services under the State to Muslim Community Act, 2005" as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution. The High Court had dealt with following questions of law: Whether Muslims, as a community, can be declared socially and educationally backward for the purposes of Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution ? Whether there was relevant and scientific material before the Commission to come to a conclusion that Muslims in Andhra Pradesh were, as a Community, backward socially and educationally ? How far the Court could go into analyzing the material which was collected by the Commission ? Whether the criteria adopted by the Commission was right and if the Court could go into the relevance of the criteria ? Case Title: Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee Vs. Shail Mittal & Ors. with 5 connected matters - minority quota for Sikhs Case No.: SLP (C) No.2755/2008 etc. (Main matter is SLP (C) No.3660/2008) The present matter pertains to an appeal filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) challenging the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, regarding reservation for Sikh students within SGPC managed institutes under minority quota. On December 17, 2007, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had struck down a notification issued by the Punjab government on April 13, 2001 which permitted the SGPC to give 50 per cent reservation to Sikh students in colleges run by it on grounds that Sikhs were a minority community. The High Court had observed that the notification had not applied the requisite parameters for adjudging a group of individuals as minority. It had said, "The country could not be taken as a unit, as has been done. There is no material to substantiate that "Sikhs" are a non-dominant group in Punjab apprehending deprivation of their rights at the hands of "dominant" groups, who may come to power in the State in a democratic election. The notifications are clearly ultra vires the jurisdiction of the State government, violating right of equality and public interest." The Apex Court will also consider whether the decision rendered by a three Judge Bench of this Court in Bal Patil & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in 2005 (6) SCC 690 is legally correct. In Bal Patil, the Apex Court had refused to grant relief to an appellant-organisation representing a section of Jain community, who had approached by writ petition the High Court of Bombay seeking issuance of a mandamus/direction to the Central Government to notify 'Jains' as a 'minority' community under section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. Case Title: V. Vasanthakumar vs H.C. Bhatia and Ors - creation of appellate wings for Supreme Court at regional benches Case No: W.P.(C)No.36/2016 This petition, filed in public interest, raises questions touching possible structural reforms at the highest echelons of the Indian judicial system. The Apex Court has referred following 11 questions of law before the larger bench on 13.07.2016: With access to justice being a fundamental right, would the said right stand denied to litigants, due to the unduly long delay in the disposal of cases in the Supreme Court? Would the mere increase in the number of judges be an answer to the problem of undue delay in disposal of cases and to what extent would such increase be feasible? Would the division of the Supreme Court into a Constitutional wing and an appellate wing be an answer to the problem? Would the fact that the Supreme Court of India is situate in the far North, in Delhi, rendering travel from the Southern states and some other states in India, unduly long and expensive, be a deterrent to real access to justice? Would the Supreme Court sitting in benches in different parts of India be an answer to the last mentioned problem? Has the Supreme Court of India been exercising jurisdiction as an ordinary court of appeal on facts and law, in regard to routine cases...

Demonitisation, EWS Quota, SEBC Reservation For Muslims, Jallikattu & More : Summary Of 25 Constitution Bench Matters To Be Listed From August 29

ANIRUDH VIJAY

Tags