DOCSLIB.ORG

214Th Report on Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges Case I, II And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
214Th Report on Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges Case I, II And GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges cases I, II and III - S. P. Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 SC 149, Supreme Court Advocates-on- Record Association Vs UOI reported in 1993 (4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SCC 739 Report No. 214 November 2008 2 THE LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA (REPORT NO. 214) Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges cases I, II and III - S. P. Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 SC 149, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association Vs UOI reported in 1993 (4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SCC 739 Forwarded to the Union Minister for Law and Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India by Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan, Chairman, Law Commission of India, on 21st day of November, 2008. 3 The 18th Law Commission was constituted for a period of three years from 1st September, 2006 by Order No. A.45012/1/2006- Admn.III (LA) dated the 16th October, 2006, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi. The Law Commission consists of the Chairman, the Member- Secretary, one full-time Member and seven part-time Members. Chairman Hon’ble Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan Member-Secretary Dr. Brahm A. Agrawal Full-time Member Prof. Dr. Tahir Mahmood Part-time Members Dr. (Mrs.) Devinder Kumari Raheja Dr. K. N. Chandrasekharan Pillai Prof. (Mrs.) Lakshmi Jambholkar Smt. Kirti Singh Shri Justice I. Venkatanarayana Shri O.P. Sharma Dr. (Mrs.) Shyamlha Pappu 4 The Law Commission is located in ILI Building, 2nd Floor, Bhagwan Das Road, New Delhi-110 001 Law Commission Staff Member-Secretary Dr. Brahm A. Agrawal Research Staff Shri Sushil Kumar :JointSecretary& Law Officer Ms. Pawan Sharma : Additional Law Officer Shri J. T. Sulaxan Rao : Additional Law Officer Shri A. K. Upadhyay : Deputy Law Officer Dr. V. K. Singh : Assistant Legal Adviser Administrative Staff Shri Sushil Kumar :JointSecretary& Law Officer Shri D. Choudhury : Under Secretary Shri S. K. Basu : Section Officer Smt. Rajni Sharma : Assistant Library & Information Officer 5 The text of this Report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in © Government Copyright 2008 Law Commission of India Government of India Ministry of Law and Justice Department of Legal Affairs New Delhi-110001 India The text in this document (excluding the Government Logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Government copyright and the title of the document specified. Any enquiries relating to this Report should be addressed to the Member- Secretary, the Law Commission of India, 2nd Floor, ILI Building, Bhagwandas Road, New Delhi-110001, India. Fax: 91-11-23388870 or E-Mail to [email protected] 6 Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan ILI Building (IInd Floor), (Former Judge, Supreme Court of India) Bhagwandas Road, Chairman, Law Commission of India New Delhi-110 001 Tel.: 91-11-23384475 Fax: 91-23383564 21.11.208 Respected Shri Bhardwajji, I am herewith enclosing our 214th Report on “Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges cases I, I and III – S.P. Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 SC 149, Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association Vs UOI reported in 1993 (4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SC 739”. The proposal was placed before the Members of the Commission at 3.30 p.m. today. The Members of the Commission after due discussion and deliberations have unanimously approved the report of the Commission. The Commission, as already stated, examined the law on the subject. Various recommendations of Parliamentary Standing Committees and law of foreign jurisdiction like America, Australia, Canada and Kenya, where the executive is the sole authority to appoint Judges or the executive appoints in consultation with the Chief Justice of the Country have also been considered. I request you to consider this report and do the needful at the earliest. Since the matter is of great importance, I am submitting this report today itself. Yours sincerely, ( AR. Lakshmanan ) Shri H.R. Bhardwaj, Hon’ble Minister for Law & Justice, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Residence: No.1,Janpath, New Delhi-110011. Tel.:91-11-23019465.23793488.23792745 E-mail:[email protected] 7 PROPOSAL FOR RECONSIDERATION OF JUDGES CASES I, II & III – S.P..Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association Vs UOI reported in 1993(4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SCC 739 Preface : Part 1 1) Why reconsideration? The Supreme Court in Subhash Sharma Vs U.O.I. (reported in 1991(1) Supp. SCC 594) presided over by Ranganath Misra CJ, M.N. Venkatachaliah and M.M. Punchi JJ had expressed, doubts about the correctness of the interpretation of the word “consultation” in regard to the appointment of judges in S.P. Gupta Vs U.O.I. (reported in 1982 SC 149) in the following words (in paras 43 & 45 of the said judgment):- “The word ‘consultation’ is used in a constitutional provision in recognition of the status of the High constitutional dignitary who 8 formally expresses the result of the institutional process leading to the appointment of judges. To limit that expression to its literal limitation shorn of its constitutional background and purpose is to borrow Justice Frankfurter’s phrase “to stick in the bark of words.” The judges in that case had opined that “Judicial Review is a part of the basic constitutional structure and one of the basic features of the essential Indian constitutional policy. The essential constitutional doctrine does not by itself justify or necessitate any primacy of the executive wing on the ground of its political accountability to the electorate. On the contrary what is necessary is an interpretation sustaining the strength and vitality of Judicial Review. It might under certain circumstances be said that government is not bound to appoint a Judge so recommended by 9 the judicial wing. But to contemplate a power for the executive to appoint a person despite his being disapproved or not recommended by the Chief Justice of the State and the Chief Justice of India would be wholly inappropriate and would constitute an arbitrary exercise of power. Then again, whenever there might be difference of opinion between the Chief Justice of a state and the Chief Justice of India – Some of the weighty reasons in this behalf are set out by the other three Judges in their opinion – the opinion of the Chief Justice of India should have the preponderant role. We are of the view that the primacy of the Chief Justice of India in the process of selection would improve the quality of selection. The purpose of the ‘consultation’ is to safeguard the independence of the judiciary and to ensure selection of proper persons. The matter is not, therefore, to be considered that the final say is the exclusive 10 prerogative of the executive government. The recommendations of the appropriate constitutional functionaries from the judicial organ of the State has an equally important role. “Consultation should have sinews to achieve the constitutional purpose and should not be rendered sterile by a literal interpretation. Who is able to decide the qualities of lawyers proposed to be elevated to the bench more than the judges of the Superior Courts before whom they practice? There are preponderant and compelling considerations why the views of the Chief Justices of the States and that of the Chief Justice of India should be afforded a decisive import unless the executive has some material in its possession which may indicate that the appointment is otherwise undesirable.(Para 44) The View which the four learned judges shared in Gupta’s case, in our opinion, does not recognize 11 the special and pivotal position of the institution of the Chief Justice of India.(Para 45) The correctness of the opinion of the majority in S.P. Gupta case relating to the status and importance of consultation, the primacy of the position of the Chief Justice of India and the view that the fixation of Judge strength is not justiciable should be reconsidered by a larger bench. (Para 45) Emphasis Supplied The operative part of the order of reference is contained in para 49 “as in our opinion the correctness of the majority view in S.P. Gupta case should be considered by a larger bench we direct the papers of W.P. No. 1303 of 1987 to be placed before the learned Chief Justice for constituting a bench of nine Judges to examine the two questions we have referred to above, namely, the position of the Chief Justice of India with reference to primacy and, secondly, 12 justiciability of fixation of judge strength”. In para 51 the Hon’ble Bench has clarified:- We clarify that apart from the two questions which we have indicated, all other aspects dealt with by us are intended to be final by our present order. (Emphasis supplied) Therefore, only two questions were referred to the bench of nine judges namely (1) The position of the Chief Justice of India with reference to primacy and (2) The justiciability of the fixation of the judge strength. It is important to note that no other question was referred to the larger bench. 2. The first judges case S.P. Gupta Vs Union of India and Ors. At this point it may be relevant to know as to what was decided by the majority judgment in the bench presided over by P.N.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appointment of Advocates in Supreme Court - a Critical Study
    International Journal of Innovative Research and Advanced Studies (IJIRAS) ISSN: 2394-4404 Volume 5 Issue 4, April 2018 Appointment Of Advocates In Supreme Court - A Critical Study S. Sozhiya Ms. Purnima 1st Year, BA.LLB (Hons), Saveetha School of Law, Saveetha Assistant Professor, Saveetha School of Law, Saveetha University University, BA.BL.LLM. Abstract: The Advocates Act of 1961 prescribes that there shall be in India two classes of advocates, advocates and senior advocates. The senior advocates shall be those advocates who have been designated by the high court or the Supreme Court if they are of the opinion that by virtue of ability virtue ability, standing at the Bar or special knowledge or experience in law, they are deserving of such distinction. In practice, the process of appointments is governed by the rules of the high court and the rules of the Supreme Court. Usually, the procedure across the country is that for an advocate to be designated, there is a requirement that the full court (i.e all the judges in that court) be in favour of it via a vote. This leads to an interesting problem though, the rank of seniority is one that is held nation wide if the designated senior advocate continues to hold their rank before other high courts and the Supreme Court. This has over the years led to the rather distasteful practice of some advocates seeking to be designated by courts that are smaller in size and then ceasing to practice in that court altogether. Thus, this research paper deals with the issues relating to the appointment of advocates in Supreme Court and the discrimination among the advocates in the appointment.
    [Show full text]
  • POLITY Current Affairs
    OPTIMIZE IAS www.optimizeias.com Telegram Link: Optimize IAS INDIAN POLITY AND GOVERNANCE June 2020-July 2021 1 | P a g e OPTIMIZE IAS Contents Constitutional Framework.........................................................................................................................13 1. Torture..............................................................................................................................................13 2. Right of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016.........................................................................14 3. Rule of law........................................................................................................................................16 4. Consumer protection act..................................................................................................................17 5. Fundamental Rights of Police...........................................................................................................18 6. 103rd Amendment...........................................................................................................................19 7. Reservations in job...........................................................................................................................20 8. NSA...................................................................................................................................................20 9. Basic structure..................................................................................................................................22
    [Show full text]
  • South Asia Judicial Barometer
    SOUTH ASIA JUDICIAL BAROMETER 1 The Law & Society Trust (LST) is a not-for- The Asian Forum for Human Rights and profit organisation engaged in human rights Development (FORUM-ASIA) works to documentation, legal research and advocacy promote and protect human rights, in Sri Lanka. Our aim is to use rights-based including the right to development, strategies in research, documentation and through collaboration and cooperation advocacy in order to promote and protect among human rights organisations and human rights, enhance public accountability defenders in Asia and beyond. and respect for the rule of law. Address : Address : 3, Kynsey Terrace, Colombo 8, S.P.D Building 3rd Floor, Sri Lanka 79/2 Krungthonburi Road, Tel : +94 11 2684845 Khlong Ton Sai, +94 11 2691228 Khlong San Bangkok, Fax : +94 11 2686843 10600 Thailand Web : lawandsocietytrust.org Tel : +66 (0)2 1082643-45 Email : [email protected] Fax : +66 (0)2 1082646 Facebook : www.fb.me/lstlanka Web : www.forum-asia.org Twitter : @lstlanka E-mail : [email protected] Any responses to this publication are welcome and may be communicated to either organisation via email or post. The opinions expressed in this publication are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers. Acknowledgements: Law & Society Trust and FORUM-ASIA would like to thank Amila Jayamaha for editing the chapters, Smriti Daniel for proofreading the publication and Dilhara Pathirana for coordinating the editorial process. The cover was designed by Chanuka Wijayasinghe, who is a designer based in Colombo, Sri Lanka. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of LST and FORUM-ASIA and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • “Process of Appointments to the Higher Judiciary”
    Volume 7, November 2019 ISSN 2581-5504 “Process of appointments to the Higher Judiciary” Shashwat Sarin O.P. Jindal Global University We all in our daily lives have heard the term judiciary and are aware that Judges decide cases and matters. But have you ever wondered who these Judges are, how they are appointed and given such a position of immense authority and responsibility. This a great question to ponder upon. The significance of having meritorious, deserving and efficient judges cannot be emphasized more and is imperative for a developing economy like India. The Indian courts are over- burdened with cases, backlog and Judges delivering badly reasoned and written judgments worsen the situation. The Constitution of India has provisions, which stipulate the appointment of Judges to the High Court and Supreme Court under Article 124 and 217. Initially, Judges in India were appointed by the collegium system to the High Courts and Supreme Courts. This system was developed through three landmark cases, also named as the Three Judges' Cases. A collegium consists of the Chief Justice of India and four other senior- most judges for appointment to the S.C and two judges of the S.C. for appointment to the High court. At the first instance, this sounds just and fair. But when we delve into this more, we realize that this is very problematic as it lacks accountability and transparency. Who is the collegium accountable to? How are the judges competent for the task? Is age the only factor to be a part of the collegium? What if the collegium has arbitrary grounds for selecting judges and the judges end up delivering devastating judgments? There is no basis for it most of the times which makes it very non-transparent.
    [Show full text]
  • POLITY and CONSTITUTION Table of Contents
    POLITY AND CONSTITUTION Table of Contents 1. ISSUES RELATED TO CONSTITUTION ____ 3 3.7. North-Eastern Council ______________ 21 1.1. Reservation _______________________ 3 3.8. Inter-State Council _________________ 21 1.1.1. Reservation in Legislative Bodies _______ 3 3.9. Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and 1.1.2. Reservation in Promotions for SC/ST. ___ 3 Diu Merged __________________________ 22 1.1.3. Reservation in Promotion for Persons with Disabilities (PwDs) ________________________ 4 3.10. Sixth Schedule ___________________ 22 1.1.4. Reservation for EWS _________________ 5 1.1.5. Job Reservations, Promotion Quotas not a 4. JUDICIARY _______________________ 23 Fundamental Right _______________________ 5 4.1. Provisions Related to Addition and 1.1.6. Bill to include more Tribes in ST Category 5 Transfer of Judges _____________________ 23 1.2. Rights ____________________________ 6 4.1.1. Addition of Judges __________________ 23 1.2.1. Internet as Basic Right _______________ 6 4.1.2. Transfer of Judges __________________ 23 1.2.2. Right to Property ____________________ 6 4.1.3. Acting Chief Justice _________________ 23 1.2.3. Sedition ___________________________ 7 4.2. Regional Bench of Supreme Court ____ 24 1.2.4. Minority Educational Institutions _______ 7 1.2.5. Sabarimala Temple Issue _____________ 8 4.3. Gram Nyayalayas __________________ 24 1.3. President _________________________ 9 4.4. National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)25 1.3.1. Impeachment of US President _________ 9 1.3.2. Pardoning Power of President _________ 9 4.5. New Rules for Tribunals ____________ 25 1.4. 9th Schedule of Indian Constitution ____ 9 4.6.
    [Show full text]
  • IMS Law Review School of Law
    0 IMS UNISON UNIVERSITY Nurturing Knowledge. Empowering Minds. IMS Law Review School of Law Edition-I ABOUT THE SCHOOL OF LAW School of Law (SOL), is amongst the fastest growing law schools in northern India. It strives to impart exemplary legal education by making it inter-disciplinary where there is a convergence between the disciplines of law, social science, humanities and management studies. Therefore, our curriculums are designed and developed to be both highly theoretical and intensely practical in nature. The school is a great teaching and research institution with a profound and distinctive commitment to undergraduate and post graduate education. To cater the student‘s varied interests and educational backgrounds, the School offers a choice of two undergraduate courses - B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) and B.B.A.LL.B. (Hons.). At the post graduate level too, the students get to pick their choice of specialization from six exceptionally designed LL.M courses. The Ph.D. program offered by the School is designed so as to be instrumental in enhancing legal scholarship. We, at School of Law understand the importance of a sound and wholesome environment for the students to flourish academically, socially and intellectually. With this belief, we have designed a disciplined curriculum with focus on high standards of legal education, extra-curricular activities and intellectual wellbeing to transform every student into a valued citizen of the society and an accomplished personality in the legal arena. Ever since its inception, School of Law aspires to inculcate humanistic approach, entrepreneurial skills, innovative outlook and academic focus in our budding lawyers.
    [Show full text]
  • Daily Prelims Notes (DPN COMPILATION) FEBRUARY 2021
    www.optimizeias.com P a g e | 1 Daily Prelims Notes (DPN COMPILATION) FEBRUARY 2021 Santosh Sir All 6 CSE Prelims qualified If I can do it, you can too www.optimizeias.com www.optimizeias.com P a g e | 2 Table of contents: ARTS, CULTURE AND HISTORY ........................................................................................... 12 AMRIT MAHOTSAV: ..................................................................................................... 12 BARGIS: ......................................................................................................................... 12 PURANA QUILA: ........................................................................................................... 13 CHAURI CHAURA INCIDENT: ...................................................................................... 13 KHAN ABDUL GHAFFAR KHAN: ................................................................................. 14 FESTIVALS OF INDIA: .................................................................................................. 15 AJANTA PAINTING: ...................................................................................................... 17 KRIMILA: ...................................................................................................................... 17 DHEKIAJULI: ................................................................................................................ 18 VIJAYANAGAR: ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Independence: the Pros and Cons
    An Open Access Journal from The Law Brigade (Publishing) Group 56 JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE: THE PROS AND CONS Written by Vanshika Shukla Research Scholar, Law, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India INTRODUCTION The concept of the independence of judiciary has always been a very furious argument for analysis, which had achieved more impulse recently. Independence of judiciary, to certify specifically, means an impartial and inactive judicial system, which can assist to take its decisions without being influenced by any external or internal firm or forces or by irrelevant considerations. The independence of the judiciary is an essential part of democracy; expect to shield the judicial process from external impact and to provide full legal protection to all individuals going to court for whatever reason. The Courts are contemplated to act as partisan of the law, who independently operate their judicial power without any practicable or individual inhibit. Such inhibits frequently comes from executive and legislative officials, political parties, the military, paramilitary and intelligence forces, criminal groups and the judicial hierarchy itself. The imminent of human blunder, specifically when human interest comes into conflict with the claims of others, requires that a judiciary should interpret the laws, and the hypothesis, which determine it, as far as potential independent of the Executive and the Legislature. The Judicial independence is a dual concept. It not only means freedom from extraneous impact but it also means an independent accession by the individual judge. Judge commitment also able to think independently for himself. He should not be fluctuating by the altercation of one side and just close his eyes to the argument of the other side.
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Appointment: Contemporary Issues and Challenges
    A Creative Connect International Publication 13 JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT: CONTEMPORARY ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Written by Harsh Pandya 2nd Year BA LLB Student, Auro University CHARACTERISTICS OF JUDICIARY AND ITS OVERVIEW The judiciary is the third organ of the government whose role is to apply the laws to specific cases and to settle the disputes. So when the judges give out their judgment the real meaning of law is defined. The court has the right to interpret the constitution. “From the citizen’s point of view, Judiciary is the most important organ of the government because it acts as their protector against the possible excesses of legislative and executive organs. Role of Judiciary as the guardian-protector of the constitution and the fundamental rights of the people makes it more respectable than other two organs”.1 “Judiciary is the repository of public faith. It is the trustee of the people. After knocking at all doors, when one fails to get his grievance redressed, judiciary is the only hope which comes to one's rescue. It is the only temple worshipped by the citizens of the country regardless of religion, caste, creed or place of birth.”2 So the people have very much trust on the judiciary and they are in the hope that if no one listens and if we knock the doors of judiciary then they will be there always to give the justice. Because the only ray of hope of the citizens is the judiciary. The judiciary is the guardian of Constitution of India and Fundamental rights of the citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • GOVERNMENT of INDIA LAW COMMISSION of INDIA Report No
    GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA REFORMS IN THE JUDICIARY – SOME SUGGESTIONS Report No. 230 August 2009 LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA (REPORT NO. 230) REFORMS IN THE JUDICIARY – SOME SUGGESTIONS Submitted to the Union Minister of Law and Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India by Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan, Chairman, Law Commission of India, on the 5th day of August, 2009. 2 The 18th Law Commission was constituted for a period of three years from 1st September, 2006 by Order No. A.45012/1/2006-Admn.III (LA) dated the 16th October, 2006, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi. The Law Commission consists of the Chairman, the Member-Secretary, one full-time Member and seven part-time Members. Chairman Hon’ble Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan Member-Secretary Dr. Brahm A. Agrawal Full-time Member Prof. Dr. Tahir Mahmood Part-time Members Dr. (Mrs.) Devinder Kumari Raheja Dr. K. N. Chandrasekharan Pillai Prof. (Mrs.) Lakshmi Jambholkar Smt. Kirti Singh Shri Justice I. Venkatanarayana Shri O.P. Sharma Dr. (Mrs.) Shyamlha Pappu 3 The Law Commission is located in ILI Building, 2nd Floor, Bhagwan Das Road, New Delhi-110 001 Law Commission Staff Member-Secretary Dr. Brahm A. Agrawal Research Staff Shri Sushil Kumar : Joint Secretary& Law Officer Ms. Pawan Sharma : Additional Law Officer Shri J. T. Sulaxan Rao : Additional Law Officer Shri A. K. Upadhyay : Deputy Law Officer Dr. V. K. Singh : Assistant Legal Adviser Dr. R. S. Shrinet : Superintendent (Legal) Administrative Staff Shri Sushil Kumar : Joint Secretary& Law Officer Shri D.
    [Show full text]
  • Upholding Judicial Supremacy in India: the Njac Judgment in Comparative Perspective
    39150-jle_49-3 Sheet No. 57 Side A 05/22/2017 10:41:02 \\jciprod01\productn\J\JLE\49-3\JLE303.txt unknown Seq: 1 17-MAY-17 10:19 UPHOLDING JUDICIAL SUPREMACY IN INDIA: THE NJAC JUDGMENT IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE REHAN ABEYRATNE* INTRODUCTION On October 16, 2015, the Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) issued a landmark judgment in Supreme Court Advocates-on- Record Association v. Union of India (NJAC Judgment).1 The judg- ment held unconstitutional the Ninety-ninth Amendment to the Indian Constitution (Constitution) and accompanying legislation, which established a National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC or Commission).2 The Indian Parliament (Parliament) created the NJAC in response to criticisms of the existing “collegium” system, in which senior Supreme Court Justices had the final word on appointments to the higher judiciary.3 The NJAC comprised the Chief Justice of India, two other senior Justices, the union minister of law and jus- tice, and two “eminent persons.”4 By including political leaders and civil society representatives, Parliament sought to bring greater transparency and accountability to the process of judicial selection.5 The Supreme Court, however, denied Parliament the authority to make this determination by issuing the NJAC Judgment before the Commission began to operate. In a long and convoluted 39150-jle_49-3 Sheet No. 57 Side A 05/22/2017 10:41:02 majority opinion, Justice Khehar held that the NJAC violated the * Assistant Professor of Law, Chinese University of Hong Kong. Member, New York State Bar. J.D. 2010, Harvard Law School; A.B. 2007, Brown University. I am grateful to Shreya Atrey, Mark Friedman, Dipika Jain, Anna Lamut, Jayantha Perera, Sarbani Sen, Arghya Sengupta, and participants at the Fifth Annual YCC Global Conference for helpful comments, and Didon Misri for excellent research assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Mock Ii Gs 2 Model Hints
    MPPSC – MAINS TEST SERIES - FULL MOCK 2 MPPSC MAINS TEST SERIES FULL MOCK II GS 2 MODEL HINTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- PAPER 2 SECTION A 3 Markers Q 1. 104th Constitutional Amendment Act Model Hints • The Constitution (104th Amendment) Act,2020: It extended the reservation of seats for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and states assemblies. • The amendment also does away with the provision for nomination of Anglo Indians. Q 2. Ninth Schedule Ans: • The Schedule contains a list of central and state laws which cannot be challenged in courts and was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. • It was created by the new Article 31B, which along with Article 31A was brought in by the government to protect laws related to agrarian reform and for abolishing the Zamindari system. • Recently, a Union Minister emphasized the need to include all reservation-related laws in the Ninth Schedule of Constitution so that they are shielded from judicial review. MPPSC - MAINS TEST SERIES Call: 9953733830 WhatsApp: 7982862964 Mail: [email protected] www.mppscadda.com MPPSC – MAINS TEST SERIES - FULL MOCK 2 Q 3. Write any two provisions relating to ‘Social Justice’ in the constitution with articles. Ans: Our Constitution guarantees justice and equality of opportunity to all its citizens. Right to Equality • Article 14. Equality before the law. • Article 15. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race. caste. sex or place of birth Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from imposing compulsory service for public purposes, and in imposing such service the State shall not make any discrimination on grounds only of religion, moo, caste or class or any of them.
    [Show full text]