Supreme Court Reopens Tomorrow : Key Hearings & Verdicts Anticipated

As the Supreme Court is set to reopen on July 8 after its summer vacation period, here is a brief recollection of the major verdicts and hearings anticipated for the coming half of the year. Key Pronouncements Which Are Awaited : 1. Constitutional Validity Of Section 6A Of Citizenship Act Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 allows foreign migrants of Indian origin, who came to Assam after the 1st January 1966 but before the 25th March 1971, to seek Indian citizenship. The challenge to its constitutionality was heard by the bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud along with Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra and subsequently the judgement was reserved on December 12, 2023.S.6A was challenged by certain indigenous groups of Assam contending that it legalised illegal infiltration of foreign migrants from Bangladesh.2. Issue Of Granting Minority Status To Aligarh Muslim University The Supreme Court bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, JB Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, Manoj Misra and SC Sharma in February reserved its judgement on the issue of granting minority status to Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). The bench was hearing a reference arising out of the 2006 verdict of the Allahabad High Court which held that AMU was not a minority institution. In 2019, a 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court referred the issue to a 7-judge bench. The main issues which arise in the case is whether a University, established and governed by a statute (AMU Act 1920), can claim minority status; the correctness of the 1976 decision in S. Azeez Basha vs. Union Of India (5-judge bench) which rejected the minority status of AMU and the 1981 amendment to the AMU Act, which accorded minority status to the University. 3. CM Kejriwal's Challenge To Arrest By ED In Liquor Policy Case The Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta had reserved Chief Minister Kejriwal's challenge to his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) on May 17. The arrest was made in relation to the ongoing Liquor Policy Controversy.The Enforcement Directorate arrested Kejriwal on March 21, after the Delhi High Court refused to grant him interim protection earlier in the day. He remained in custody thereafter, until he was granted the benefit of interim release by the Supreme Court on May 10. The same expired on June 2 and is subject to other conditions, including that he shall not attend the CM office and/or sign official files (unless necessitated by LG). It may be noted that on July 5 the Delhi High Court issued notice in the plea moved by Kejriwal seeking bail and sought a response from CBI. The High Court will now hear the bail plea on July 17. 4. Centre v. State Powers Over Taxing Of Mineral Rights & Mining Leases The issue of whether royalties on mining leases be considered as tax and whether the States have the power to levy royalty/tax on mineral rights was considered by a 9-judge Constitution Bench. The bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud comprises Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Abhay Oka, BV Nagarathna, JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Ujjal Bhuyan, SC Sharma and AG Masih reserved its judgement on March 14. The main issue before the Court was to examine the nature and scope of royalty as prescribed under Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) and whether it could be termed as tax.5. Interpretation Of Article 39(b) Of The Constitution In Context of Private Resources A 9-judge Constitution bench considered the issue of whether private resources form part of the 'material resource of the community' under Article 39(b) of the Constitution. The key aspects raised included questions revolving around what constitutes a community, the subjective tones of 'material resource' as well and the fate of Article 31C post the decision in Minerva Mills v. Union of India.The 9-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Hrishikesh Roy, B.V. Nagarathna, Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Rajesh Bindal, Satish Chandra Sharma and Augustine George Masih reserved its decision on May 1. 6. Validity Of Subclassification Within The Scheduled Castes(SCs) And Scheduled Tribes(STs) For Reservations The issue of the validity of Subclassification with the reserved categories was referred to a 7-judge bench by a 5-judge bench in 2020 in the case State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh. The 5-judge bench observed that the judgment of the coordinate bench in E.V.Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2005) 1 SCC 394, which held that sub-classification was not permissible, and required to be reconsidered. A Constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud comprising Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma reserved its decision on February 9. 7. Challenge To The Penal Provisions Of CGST/SGST Act...

Supreme Court Reopens Tomorrow : Key Hearings & Verdicts Anticipated

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Tags