SC: You went before the CJI and said there is great urgency. You just read newspapers and come file writ petition. We thought of directing Registry to not entertain any plea by you apart from imposing costs.
Counsel: please don't do so my lord.
Justice BR Gavai: what is your locus. As a lawyer you should have advised your client
SC: This plea has been filed by bangalore based lawyer is for a prayer that NEET PG cut off be relaxed. This matter was mentioned for listing showing urgency and the need for interim order to be passed. The NBE has relaxed cut off earlier by 15%
SC: The petitioner has no connection with the cause of the case. On enquiry it was informed that the person is a public spirited person. PRECIOUS TIME OF COURT IS WASTED such time can be spent in hearing more pressing matters which is awaiting listing. Petitioner is warned
SC: Petitioner is warned against filing such petitions to which he has no connection at all.
Supreme Court is hearing a petition filed by Amazon against Delhi HC order staying further arbitration proceedings before the Singapore Tribunal against Future Group
CJI NV Ramana: Let the arbitration start if you have no issues (To Sr Adv Harish Salve) #AmazonvsFuture
Sr Adv Salve for Future: I have already agreed yesterday .. Then this matter will end here today
Sr Adv Rohatgi: the entire dispute of division bench came up since our application was not taken up at the correct time
Sr Adv Gopal Subramaniam: I have no problem if the tribunal takes up the Section 32 application first. but if the application is not entertained, then the final hearing should be completed. We need some interim protection
#SupremeCourt hears Union of India Vs Lt Col Ranjeet Singh where the charge against the officer was cutting trees in campus and used the money for personal use and not deposit it in army corpus
Attorney General KK Venugopal: This plea raises issues of general importance
AG: Court of enquiry was held. Commanding officer had to hear the charges the against him. Even the accused can have witnesses on behalf of him. #supremecourt
AG: All witnesses are examined and cross examined in court of enquiry. Section 157 of Army act concerns summary general court martial #supremecourt
The Supreme Court will pronounce today its judgment on a plea filed by Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement seeking implementation of the "One Rank One Pension" (OROP) in Defense Forces.
In its affidavit, Centre had in certain terms stated that both 'same rank' and 'same length of service' in defense services are necessary conditions for claiming One Rank One Pension benefits.
Just in: The Bench headed by Justice Chandrachud will assemble for judgment after hearing before the special bench matter listed in Chief Justice's Court at 10:30 AM is over.
#SupremeCourt special bench led by CJI NV Ramana to hear the plea seeking cancellation of bail granted to Ashish Mishra in the Lakhimpur Kheri case. Adv Prashant Bhushan has alleged that one of the prime witness was beaten up #lakhimpurkheri
CJI to state of UP: We will issue notice. There is an allegation that a witness has been attacked. You have to file a detailed counter affidavit. You have to see that witnessed are protected. List on March 24
[BREAKING] Appeal against Karnataka HC verdict upholding #HijabBan to be mentioned in CJI NV Ramana's court today. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde to mention #KarnatakaHijabRow#SupremeCourt
Plea says the #HijabBan order creates an unreasonable classification between the non-Muslim female students and the Muslim female students and thereby is in straight violation of the concept of Secularism which forms the basic structure of the Indian Constitution #SupremeCourt
Senior Advocates Devadatt Kamat and Sanjay Hegde to mention the #HijabBan appeal as Mentioning item 12 #supremecourt
#SupremeCourt to hear an appeal filed by Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited against the Kerala High Court decision upholding the government’s move to not renew the licence of its TV channel, Media One, on the ground of “national security and public order”
Sr Adv Dushyant Dave: there was a matter before the Supreme Court today where CJI said " i dont want sealed covers here. we dont want it."