Tag: B.R. Gavai CJI

Judiciary vs Parliament: Supreme Court Repeats Warning on Tribunal Independence
7Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Judiciary vs Parliament: Supreme Court Repeats Warning on Tribunal Independence

In Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court struck down the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, declaring its provisions on age limits, tenure, and appointment committees unconstitutional. The Court held the Act was an impermissible legislative override, violating the principles of separation of powers, judicial independence, and constitutional supremacy established in its prior judgements. Facts Of The Case: The Madras Bar Association challenged the constitutional validity of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, before the Supreme Court of India. The Act sought to govern the appointment, tenure, qualifications, and service conditions of members across various tribunals. Its key provisions included a minimum age of 50 for appointment, a fixed four-year tenure, a ...
Read More
Judicial Propriety Upheld: Supreme Court Says Validity of Sanction Must Be Challenged Only Before It
2Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Judicial Propriety Upheld: Supreme Court Says Validity of Sanction Must Be Challenged Only Before It

The Supreme Court ruled that when a sanction order is issued pursuant to its ongoing monitoring of proceedings, its validity can only be challenged before the Supreme Court itself. No other court, including a High Court, is entitled to entertain such a challenge or grant a stay on that sanction while the matter remains pending before the apex court. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from the Supreme Court's suo moto action concerning illegal construction and rampant tree felling within the Corbett Tiger Reserve. The investigation, initially directed by the Uttarakhand High Court and later monitored by the Supreme Court, was conducted by the CBI. The CBI filed a final report, leading to the requirement of prosecution sanction against involved officers. While the State of ...
Read More
Supreme Court Closes Contempt Case, Emphasizes Lawyers’ Responsibility as “Officers of the Court”
31Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Closes Contempt Case, Emphasizes Lawyers’ Responsibility as “Officers of the Court”

In this suo moto contempt proceeding, the Supreme Court strongly deprecated the growing trend of lawyers making scandalous allegations against judges in pleadings. Reaffirming that an advocate's overriding duty is to the court as its officer, the Court cautioned that subscribing to such pleadings amounts to contempt. However, accepting the unconditional apology tendered before the concerned High Court Judge, it closed the proceedings. Facts Of The Case: In a criminal transfer petition (TP(Crl.) No. 613 of 2025) filed before the Supreme Court, the pleadings contained scurrilous and scandalous allegations against a sitting Judge of the Telangana High Court. When the bench expressed its displeasure, the petitioner's counsel sought to withdraw the petition. The Court, however, refused permis...
Read More
No Complete Freeze on Waqf Law, Says Supreme Court: Caps Non-Muslim Members on Boards
4Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

No Complete Freeze on Waqf Law, Says Supreme Court: Caps Non-Muslim Members on Boards

In an interim order, the Supreme Court declined to stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, upholding the legislative presumption of constitutionality. However, it partially stayed specific provisions, including the "five-year practice of Islam" requirement and certain clauses related to government property inquiries, deeming them prima facie arbitrary pending a final constitutional validity hearing. Facts Of The Case: A batch of writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, before the Supreme Court. The petitioners, arguing on behalf of Muslim community interests, contended that the amendments violated fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, and 300A of the Constitution. Key challenges were mounted against provisions that de-recog...
Read More
Supreme Court Directs Madhya Pradesh to Follow Central Rules for Forest Officers Performance Reports
4Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Directs Madhya Pradesh to Follow Central Rules for Forest Officers Performance Reports

The Supreme Court quashed the Madhya Pradesh Government Order (G.O.) dated 29th June 2024, which allowed IAS officers to evaluate Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers' Performance Appraisal Reports (PAR). Reaffirming its 2000 ruling, the Court held that IFS officers up to the rank of Additional Principal Chief Conservator must be assessed by their departmental superiors, not IAS officers, to maintain service hierarchy and accountability under the All-India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970. The State was directed to amend its rules within one month to comply with this mandate. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from a challenge to the Madhya Pradesh Government Order (G.O.) dated 29th June 2024, which mandated that Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers – specifically Distric...
Read More