Namrata Banerjee

A snapshot of arguments submitted by petitioners and respondents on the appointment of judicial officers under the Bar quota

Respondents argued that there are distinct streams for District Judge appointments; any other interpretation would amend the Constitution

Petitioners argued that judicial officers and practising advocates are equivalent under the scheme of the Constitution

Arguments centered on whether Article 233(2) restricts appointment of judicial officers as district judges under the bar quota

Umar Khalid has been in custody since September 2020 over conspiracy charges in the 2020 Delhi riots, with repeated rejection of bail pleas

The Bench recommended the Union Government to consider imposing fines or imprisonment under the Indian penal laws

The Bench observed that documents like the Aadhaar and driving licences were permitted by the law and could not be excluded by the ECI

The Court had referred the case to a larger bench based on an appeal from a judicial officer whose selection was set aside

Our matrix gives a snapshot of arguments presented by the parties in the Presidential Reference on the powers of Governor and President

The Union stressed that nearly 90 percent of all Bills have received assent within a month

Petitioners argued that the Booth Level Officers were refusing to accept Aadhaar despite the Court’s earlier directions

The states of West Bengal, Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh stressed the significance of the aid and advice of the Council of Minister

The states warned that endorsing withholding powers of Governor would leave the bills in a permanent limbo

The Union argued against the power of states to approach the Supreme Court under its writ jurisdiction challenging the actions of Governor

Counsel supporting the Presidential Reference submitted that the Court could not set timelines to address delays

The Court held that no offence by Mahmudabad was disclosed in the FIR, barred the courts from taking cognisance of the chargesheet

The Court dismissed demands to extend the 1 September deadline for filing claims and objections to the draft electoral rolls

The Court questioned if silence or delay by a Governor could amount to a “pocket veto,” despite the Union’s denial.

The Bench questioned whether the absolute power to withhold assent could erode legislative supremacy

The State of Tamil Nadu argued that the Presidential Reference is couched as a review and is not maintainable