Scribd
Upload
26 views

Refered To Consti Bench

The Supreme Court of India referred a group of petitions challenging the validity of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014 to a larger bench of five judges. The petitioners argued that the amendments and Act altered the basic structure of the Indian Constitution and should be set aside. The Court did not decide the case on merits but referred it to a larger bench for consideration as substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution were involved. The Court also did not grant any interim relief to the petitioners.

Uploaded by

Vikram Bij
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views

Refered To Consti Bench

The Supreme Court of India referred a group of petitions challenging the validity of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014 to a larger bench of five judges. The petitioners argued that the amendments and Act altered the basic structure of the Indian Constitution and should be set aside. The Court did not decide the case on merits but referred it to a larger bench for consideration as substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution were involved. The Court also did not grant any interim relief to the petitioners.

Uploaded by

Vikram Bij
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION


WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.13 OF 2015
 
 
SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD ASSOCIATION AND ANR      …
PETITIONERS
versus
UNION OF INDIA
… RESPONDENT
 
with
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.14, 18, 23, 24,70, 83, 108 & 124 OF 2015
with
TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO.391 OF 2015
ORDER
 
ANIL R. DAVE, J.
1. In this group of petitions, validity of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act,
2014 and the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as
`the Act’) has been challenged. The challenge is on the ground that by virtue of the aforestated
amendment and enactment of the Act, basic structure of the Constitution of India has been
altered and therefore, they should be set aside.
2. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and the parties appearing in-
person at length.
3. It has been mainly submitted for the petitioners that all these petitions should be referred
to a Bench of Five Judges as per the provisions of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India for
the reason that substantial questions of law with regard to interpretation of the Constitution of
India are involved in these petitions. It has been further submitted that till all these petitions are
finally disposed of, by way of an interim relief it should be directed that the Act should not be
brought into force and the present system with regard to appointment of Judges should be
continued.
4. Sum and substance of the submissions of the counsel opposing the petition is that all
these petitions are premature for the reason that the Act has not come into force till today and till
the Act comes into force, cause of action can not be said to have arisen. In the circumstances,
according to the learned counsel, the petitions should be rejected.
5. The learned counsel as well as parties in-person have relied upon several judgments to
substantiate their cases.
6. Looking at the facts of the case, we are of the view that these petitions involve substantial
questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India and therefore, we direct the
Registry to place all the matters of this group before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India so that
they can be placed before a larger Bench for its consideration.
7. As we are not deciding the cases on merits, we do not think it appropriate to discuss the
submissions made by the learned counsel and the parties in-person.
8. It would be open to the petitioners to make a prayer for interim relief before the larger
bench as we do not think it appropriate to grant any interim relief at this stage.
………………………………………J.
(ANIL R. DAVE)
………………………………………J.
(J. CHELAMESWAR)
………………………………………J.
(MADAN B. LOKUR)
NEW DELHI,
APRIL 07, 2015.
- See more at: http://onelawstreet.com/njac-challenge-referred-to-constitution-bench-
supreme-court-aor-association-v-uoi-judgment-7-april-2015/#sthash.kuURKlT8.dpuf

You might also like