#SupremeCourt hears PIL pertaining to vacancies in Information Commissions set up under the Right to Information (RTI) Act
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi
Adv Prashant Bhushan (for petitioner): 5 orders by this Court to fill up vacancies, but they keep seeking time...no transparency. They have not put out shortlisting criteria and shortlisted names in public domain. They have to be put out prior to appointment! They are saying they can appoint someone who has not even applied
J Kant: You're right there's delay. But they are asking for 2-3 more weeks. Can wait.
J Kant: Let the right time come
Bhushan: What is the right time? They are saying they have shortlisted
ASG KM Nataraj: They can't make these arguments before appointment
Bhushan: This Court said they have to state on affidavit before appointment...
J Kant: Appointment is not fait accompli.
#SupremeCourt #InformationCommissions
Bhushan: We are asking for transparency. People have right to know who are the people who have applied, what is the shortlisting criteria and who has been shortlisted
J Kant: This information will come in public domain. We will get that information
Bhushan: This, people need to know before appointment
ASG: They are mixing eligibility and suitability of candidates.
#SupremeCourt #InformationCommissions
ASG: Let the appointment process be completed
J Kant (to Bhushan): If we start having judicial scrutiny for every stage, there will be no selection. Transparency will have to be there, we will ensure. Right to know is there, there can't be exception to that
#SupremeCourt #InformationCommissions
J Kant: If any ineligible person is considered, we will examine it
Bhushan: Why people of this country not have a right to know who is being considered? States are disclosing the names, why should not the centre?
J Kant: We will make sure they disclose
Order: As regards to CIC, we are informed that Search Committee has completed exercise and Selection Committee comprising PM of India, LoP and [...] will consider the applicants within 3 weeks. We have no reason to doubt that Union shall follow the guidelines laid down in Anjali Bhardwaj case and finalize the process at the earliest.
#SupremeCourt
Bhushan: In Jharkhand, Commission defunct since May, 2020. Nothing happening
Counsel for Jharkhand: We are taking steps. Time of 45 days may be granted
Order: Chief Secretary, Jharkhand is directed to ensure that pending selection process is completed within 45 days. On failure to file compliance affidavit, Court would be constrained to take [strict action]
Bhushan: No govt wants transparency. They are killing the RTI Act. Best way to destroy the Act is the non-appointment.
#SupremeCourt #InformationCommissions
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#SupremeCourt issues notice to all states in the suo moto case regarding digital arrest scams based on forged court orders.
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi
Attorney General for India R Venkatramani appearing.
J Kant: there are more than one instance taken place in different parts. We are inclined to entrust the matter to CBI in respect of all the states because this is a kind of crime which is operating maybe Pan India or maybe even across the border also.
AGI: there are money laundering gangs located outside our territory. In many parts of Asia - Myanmar, Thailand etc.
J Kant: we will appreciated if the state takes stand that yes this matter should be investigated by a central agency.
#SupremeCourt hears plea challenging Telangana HC order which stayed the govt decision to raise quota for Backward Classes in municipalities and panchayats to 42%, which pushed the total reservations in local bodies to 67%
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta
Sr Adv Dr AM Singhvi (for State): This Court did not fix a limit of 50% [on reservation]...let me show 1 paragraph of Indra Sawhney judgment
Sr Adv Gopal S (for respondents) objects: The GO increased reservation to 42%...taking total to more than 60%...CB judgment in Krishna Murthy specifically says 50%...Indra Sawhney dealt with socially backward classes etc., there you can.
#SupremeCourt #Telangana
For context, Krishna Murthy judgment held:
"The upper ceiling of 50% vertical reservations in favour of SCs/STs/OBCs should not be breached in the context of local self-government. Exceptions can only be made in order to safeguard the interests of the Scheduled Tribes in the matter of their representation in panchayats located in the Scheduled Areas."
#BREAKING Attorney General for India consents to initiation of criminal contempt action against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai inside the Supreme Court
Sr Adv Vikas Singh (SCBA President) and SG Tushar Mehta mention matter before J Surya Kant-led bench
Singh: It's going on and on over social media...he is further saying I have no remorse
SG: Some people are glorifying it...saying it's too late to have done this
J Surya Kant: Hon'ble CJI has been magnanimous...that shows the institution is not affected by these kind of incidents
Singh: Lord Vishnu will not say you take to violence to do something like this...it's an insult to God also whom he has sought to...
J Kant: Violence can never be promoted. Just think, what will happen when you initiate this kind of proceedings? Social media, everything becomes a saleable item
Singh: Please consider John-Doe order
J Bagchi: It's for us and our behavior in courts that we survive. It's that spirit which Hon'ble CJI exhibited. Just washed it aside. You have come before us, our request is to consider whether against breaking up an issue which for us is complete, will it help giving opportunity to these chirping elements to go on?
#SupremeCourt
J Bagchi: Many important matters before us...will this not [waste time]
Singh: We are seeking restraint on glorifying of shoe-throwing
J Kant: The moment you take any action now it will become episode No.2.
#BiharSIR: #SupremeCourt to hear today the pleas challenging Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's electoral rolls
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi
On Oct 9, the Court passed an interim order to ensure free legal aid for persons excluded from the final voters' list so they can file appeals against their exclusion
#BiharElection2025
Further, activist Yogendra Yadav urged the Court to direct ECI to disclose how many persons were found to be foreigners after the exercise
He said that the Court would be doing a "great service to the nation" by directing ECI to disclose the number of persons whose names have been deleted on ground that they were not citizens.
#SupremeCourt #BiharSIR
On Oct 7, the Court orally said that there was some confusion as to whether voters added in the final electoral list were from the list of voters who were previously deleted from the draft list or totally new names
Petitioners demanded that the ECI must publish the list of names of 3.66 lakh voters who were additionally deleted from the final list, and the names of the 21 lakh voters who were included in it.