Latest news with #SC
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Ex-CJP moves SC against PM Shehbaz
Former chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Jawwad S Khawaja has filed a petition in the Supreme Court, seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif for not implementing an SC constitutional bench's (CB) order in the May 9 rioters' military trial case. A full CB of the apex court on May 7 accepted appeals against the Supreme Court's October 2023 order, setting aside the trial of over 100 May 9 rioters by military authorities. However, in the majority order, the CB, sensitized "the need of legislative changes", compliant to the requirements laid down under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) for maintaining and preserving the constitutional and societal norms in the existing legal framework. "Therefore, the matter is referred to the Government/Parliament for considering and making necessary amendments/legislation in the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, and allied Rules within a period of 45 days. "[This is necessary] in order to provide an independent right of appeal in the high court against the conviction awarded to the persons by the court martial/military courts under sub-clauses (i) & (ii) of Clause (d) of subsection (1) of Section 2 of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, read with sub-section (4) of Section 59 of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952," the order said. Justice (retd) Khawaja stated that during the hearing of the case, Attorney-General for Pakistan Mansoor Awan referred to the Jurist Foundation vs Federal Government case "which has been expressly noted by the CB in its short order. "In that case, the SC concluded that there was no provision for the tenure/retirement age or the extension of the COAS in the laws relating to the armed forces. Based on assurances given by the federation, the government was given a six-month time period to legislate to fill this vacuum," he said. The petition said the SC held that in order to give effect to a constitutional mandate, the court has the authority to direct the federal government to initiate and process legislation. "In the present case, the CB has referred to the Jurist Foundation judgment in its short order. The petition noted that the federal government has been directed to legislate to provide a right to appeal in the high court for civilians convicted by military courts. "This is a court direction to enforce a constitutional mandate and protect fundamental rights," it added. The petition said the short order was passed on May 7 and the federal government was given 45 days to make amendments providing a right to appeal to the high court for civilians convicted by military courts. It noted that the 45-day period has lapsed and while the short order holds the field, the federal government has failed to comply with it.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Apex court lifts HC stay on West Bengal OBC list
NEW DELHI: In a major relief to Mamata Banerjee government , the Supreme Court on Monday lifted the Calcutta HC stay on implementation of the new list of OBC sub-groups, including 80 belonging to the Muslim community, and said it is well settled that the Executive can notify such a list without passing a legislation. On June 17, the HC had stayed the new OBC List entitling to quota benefits 140 sub-groups under OBC-A and OBC-B categories. The earlier list, which was struck down by HC, had 113 OBC sub-groups, with 77 from the Muslim community and 36 from others. The appeal of the Bengal govt challenging the quashing of the earlier list is still pending before the SC. Appearing for the state, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said the stay has put the govt in a piquant position as it faces the task of recruiting 40,000 teachers and preparing a roster. A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Najaria said, "Prima facie the HC order is erroneous. A 9-judge constitution bench of the SC has settled the law and ruled that List of sub-groups for availing quota can be notified by the Executive without a legislation". On a petition by one Amal Chandra Das challenging the new OBC list, an HC bench of Justices Tapabrata Chakraborty and Rajasekhar Mantha had on June 17 directed that executive notifications issued between May 8 and June 13 about OBC categories will not go into effect till July 31. The SC bench said: "How the HC stay the notification without giving reasons? It is in the teeth of a constitution bench judgment of the SC. If you all agree, we can request the HC chief justice to assign the matter to a special bench, other than the judges who heard the matter, and decide the issue on merits". Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocates Ranjit Kumar and Guru Krishna Kumar said the HC has not imposed any stay on the implementation of OBC reservations based on the list existing prior to 2010, which had 66 sub-groups. "It is the state which has enacted legislation laying down the procedure for inclusion and exclusion of sub-groups from OBC List. Once the procedure is laid down in law, it must be followed scrupulously, which the govt didn't, thus, inviting a stay from the HC," they said. "The state law mandates that the State Backward Class Commission is to be consulted, which was not done by the state. No survey was undertaken to identify the sub-groups which should be included. What they did was to reintroduce the list of sub-groups whose inclusion was quashed by the HC earlier," they held. Sibal, on the other hand, said a survey was done and 76 new sub-groups were added to the earlier list. The petitioner had not challenged the survey done for this purpose, he said.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SIR in Bihar: Accept Aadhaar along with voter ID, SC tells EC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday told the to proceed to authenticate voters based on Aadhaar card and Electors Photo Identity Card (EPIC) and said that Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state should be aimed at en masse inclusion rather than en masse exclusion. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, however, turned down the plea for putting a stay on SIR exercise. Instead, the court said it would hold daily hearings to enable an expeditious ruling on the issue. To EC's argument that Aadhaar was not a conclusive proof of identity, the court asked which single document gave conclusive proof and told the commission to accept Aadhaar along with EPIC for verifying a voter's credentials. The court in its July 10 order had said, "It would be in the interests of justice if the EC also considers the following three documents such as 1) Aadhaar card; 2) EPIC issued by EC, and 3) Ration card, as these documents would satisfy most of the voters." Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, arguing on behalf of petitioners, told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that the EC is still not considering these three documents to authenticate the voters and could lead to mass exclusion of names of persons from voters list. For EC, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi and Maninder Singh told the SC that the commission had difficulty in accepting ration cards as proof of voters because of large-scale irregularities found earlier. "The revision forms given to people are pre-filled with their EPIC numbers. Since EPIC is not a conclusive proof, the voters must show some other document to authenticate names on the voter list." 'The revision forms given to people are pre-filled with their EPIC numbers. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Since EPIC is not a conclusive proof, the voters must show some other document to authenticate names on the voter list.' The bench said, 'None of these documents can be said to be conclusive proof of identity. Which is that document giving conclusive proof? Why would you not accept Aadhaar as a conclusive document alongside EPIC? Any document, including Aadhaar can be forged. So, proceed with (SIR while accepting) Aadhaar and EPIC' When Dwivedi raised the apprehension that Aadhaar too could be forged, the bench said the EC can prosecute individuals who attempt to authenticate their names as voters by providing forged documents. 'An exercise of this nature cannot be for en masse exclusion. It should aim for en masse inclusion,' the bench said. Sankaranarayanan said till the time the issue about documents relating to SIR is decided by the SC on adjudication of the petitions, the EC should not proceed with the exercise. Justice Kant-led bench said, 'The earlier order is clear – there cannot be any interim order in this case.' The senior counsel persisted for maintenance of status quo or clarification that SIR would be subject to outcome of petitions in SC. The bench said if it agreed with petitioners, then it had power to quash SIR. 'We need to hear the petitions as expeditiously as possible. Counsel for petitioners must give by Tuesday a schedule detailing the time to be taken by each counsel. We will hear it on a day-to-day basis,' it said.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Assent to bills: Tamil Nadu govt moves SC, says Presidential reference is 'appeal in disguise'
New Delhi, The Tamil Nadu government on Monday urged the Supreme Court to declare the Presidential reference raising constitutional issues on whether timelines could be imposed for dealing with bills passed by state assemblies as not maintainable and return it as unanswered, saying it is an "appeal in disguise". Assent to bills: Tamil Nadu govt moves SC, says Presidential reference is 'appeal in disguise' A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, which has sought the replies of the Centre and all states in a week, will consider the Presidential reference on Tuesday and would fix timelines and other procedural details for hearing. In an intervention application, the Tamil Nadu government said it is "filing the present application for directions from this court to declare that the Presidential Reference dated May 13, 2025 issued by her excellency, the President of India is not maintainable and to return the said reference as unanswered in whole, without prejudice to the arguments advanced by the Appellant before this Court". It said the President has made the above Presidential reference under the Article 143 of the Constitution of India seeking the opinion of this Court on 14 questions that include the interpretation of the powers of the governor under the Article 200 of the Constitution and the powers of the President under the Article 201 of the Constitution along with ancillary issues. "It is prima-facie evident that the present Presidential reference is nothing but an appeal in disguise to disturb the settled law and overrule the findings already pronounced by this Court due to which the present Presidential reference ceases to raise any such legitimate substantial questions of law leading to an expediency in obtaining the opinion of this Court. "Therefore, the Presidential reference dated May 13, 2025 deserves to be unanswered as a whole and liable to be returned," the state government said. On July 22, the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar observed that the issues raised in the Presidential reference will affect the "entire country". The Tamil Nadu government in its application further said the Presidential reference raises questions of law pertaining to interpretation of the powers of the governor and the President along with ancillary issues which have been directly answered by the Supreme Court in April 8 verdict in the case of State of Tamil Nadu versus the Governor of Tamil Nadu in an exhaustive manner. It said the Presidential reference was issued by the President merely one month after April 8, 2025 that is the date of pronouncement of the judgement. "A cursory view of the whereas clauses forming the Presidential reference would reflect that the above reference has been issued to overrule the decision and directions of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu judgement and make it clear that the above Presidential reference is nothing but an appeal in disguise, which is impermissible in law as this court has no power to overrule its own judgements by way of Article 143," the plea said. The state government said the present Presidential reference is "headless and devoid of merit" and currently, no review or curative petition has been preferred by the governor of Tamil Nadu against the judgement of this court. Meanwhile, the Kerala government has also sought dismissal of the Presidential reference and said it cannot be used to overrule findings of law and facts in earlier judgments. In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised powers under Article 143 to know from the top court whether timelines could be imposed by judicial orders for exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with the bills passed by state assemblies. The President's decision comes in light of the April 8 verdict of the apex court passed in a matter over the powers of governor in dealing with bills questioned by the Tamil Nadu government. The verdict for the first time prescribed that the President should decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by the governor within three months from the date on which such reference is received. In a five-page reference, President Murmu posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court and sought to know its opinion on powers of governor, President under Articles 200 and 201 in dealing with bills passed by the state legislature. The verdict has set a timeline for all governors to act on the bills passed by the state assemblies and ruled that the governor does not possess any discretion in exercise of functions under Article 200 of the Constitution in respect to any bill presented to them and must mandatorily abide by the advice tendered by the council of ministers. It had said state governments can directly approach the Supreme Court if the President withholds assent on a bill sent by a governor for consideration. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- General
- Time of India
218 JBT posts up for graps in Chandigarh primary govt schools
Chandigarh: The Chandigarh education department has launched the long-pending recruitment drive for Junior Basic Teachers (JBTs) under the Samagra Shiksha scheme, inviting online applications for 218 contractual posts in primary govt schools across the city. The advertisement was issued on Monday, and online application window will open on Aug 7 and close on Aug 28, while the last date for fee payment is Aug 30. "These appointments are crucial for addressing the teacher shortage in govt primary schools and for strengthening foundational education across the Union Territory," said Harsuhinder Pal Singh Brar, director of school education. Applicants must be graduates with a two-year diploma in elementary education and should have cleared the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET). A certificate in computer skills will be required before appointment. The selected candidates will be paid a fixed monthly remuneration of Rs 45,260. Of the total posts, 111 are for general category, 44 for OBC, 41 for SC, and 22 for EWS. Eight posts are reserved for persons with disabilities and 22 for ex-servicemen. The selection will be based entirely on an objective-type written test of 150 marks. There will be no interview. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Your Home Could Fund Your Goals- Borrow up to $400k NerdWallet Learn More Undo The test will cover general awareness, reasoning, teaching aptitude, language skills, and subject-specific knowledge, with negative marking of 0.25 marks for each wrong answer. A minimum of 40% marks will be required to qualify. All official notices, answer keys, and merit lists will be uploaded to the Samagra Shiksha website. Key dates Application window: Aug 7 to 28 Last date to pay fee: Aug 30 Official website: Post details Total posts: 218 General: 111, OBC: 44, SC: 41, EWS: 22 PWD: 8, Ex-servicemen: 22
