Supreme Court resumes hearing the challenge to the Allahabad High Court verdict which struck down the UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004
Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: the judgment goes against the principle of secularism.. it essentially helps that concept by allowing this education..
CJI DY Chandrachud: secularism essentially means to live and let live
Rohatgi: the HC has gone against it.
#Madrasas #SupremeCourt
CJI: are you standing by the validity of the act...
ASG KM Natraj: Yes I support the validity of the act. But since constitutionality has been struck down we want to say something. we are defending the legislation but the state did not file a SLP
ASG: when high court struck down the act, we accepted it.
CJI: but you are saying you stand by the act
ASG: yes we filed a counter.. supporting the law. we can support in legal issues
CJI: as a state you have wide powers under section 20 to ensure basic quality of education in madrasas and as the state if you find that this basic level is not followed then you can intervene and that was your stand before the HC and you said act need not be struck down
ASG: the law can be struck down if it is against fundamental rights or its foul of legislative competence. But in this case... it has to be tested only against part III of the constitution.
#SupremeCourt to shortly hear PIL by BJP leader and former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy seeking deletion of the terms "socialist" and "secular" from Preamble to the Indian Constitution
The plea challenges 42nd amendment Act which added terms "socialist" and "secular" to describe India in Preamble.
Plea also challenges provisions of Representation of the People Act, 1951, requiring political parties to give undertaking to uphold secularism to get registered.
Bench: Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar
#SupremeCourt is hearing appeal against April 8 order of Delhi High Court recognising Central Delhi Court Bar Association as main bar body for Rouse Avenue District Court
Bench: Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
Delhi HC had rejected claim of Rouse Avenue Bar Association, Delhi Rouse Avenue Court Bar Association & Rouse Avenue District Court Bar Association which had all staked their claim to be declared as recognised bar association for Rouse Avenue Court
Appeal against Madras HC judgment which ordered police investigation into the ashram run by Sadguru, Isha Foundation
Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: These are issues of religious freedom. This is a very urgent and serious case. This is about Ishal foundation, there is Sadguru who is very revered and has lakhs of followers.
#Sadguru #SupremeCourt
SG: HC should have been very circumspect. This needs your attention
#sadguru
The plea is by Isha Foundation, led by spiritual leader Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, as a team of 150 police officers descended upon its Thondamuthur ashram on Tuesday.
The search, spearheaded by an Assistant Deputy Superintendent from Coimbatore, came at the directive of the Madras High Court, which requested a comprehensive report on all criminal cases tied to the foundation
Supreme Court to shortly hear case where it said it will issue guidelines for bulldozer-led demolitions and anti-encroachment drives.
#SupremeCourtOfIndia #SupremeCourt #Bulldozer
Sr Adv Sanjay Hegde: I am for the fruit seller in Jahangirpuri in whose matter it first reached here. I only urge that it be listed today along with this and tagged.
SC: Okay. Did you tell the other side?
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: I am appearing for three States including Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. Very dispassionately I will give my suggestions, UP has in fact shown the way.
SC: But can being criminal accused be a ground?
SG: No absolutely not. Even for heinous crimes like rape or terrorism. Like my lord said it cannot also be that notice issued stuck one day before, it has to be in advance. Town planning authorities have that provision, lordships may say written be given by registered post so this pasting business stops and it gives 10 days time from date of receipt.
#SupremeCourt hears the case of the son of a dalit daily wager who cracked IIT Dhanbad but could not get admitted since he missed fees payment deadline
CJI: we cannot allow such a young talent boy to go away. He went to jharkhand legal services authority. then he is to chennai legal services and then he is sent to high court. he is a dalit boy being made to run from pillar to post.
Authority: It was not the login at last minute. in mock interview he was told to pay. NIC sent him a SMS and IIT sent him two whatsapp chats to finish payment..
CJI: he is the son of a daily wager.. there is something called.. we know technology is good.
Adv for petitioner: daily wage is 450 rupees. task of arranging 17,500 is a big deal. he collected the money from villagers
CJI: in article 142.. there are some cases we keep the law a little aside
CJI: he does all the hard work to get into IIT.. if he had 17,000 why will he not pay..
Adv for authority: but he made login every day
CJI: this shows how diligent he is..
Justice Pardiwala: the seat allotment intimation slip shows that you wanted him to pay and if he did then nothing else was required.. why are you opposing so much !! thats it (to the authority)