Supreme Court Observer

✨ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 👨🏾‍⚖️ Yesterday, the SC transferred all the petitions before itself and other HCs challenging the Agnipath Recruitment Scheme to the Delhi HC. The Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, Surya Kant, and A.S. Bopanna stated that the HC’s jurisdiction ‘must not lose significance’ and that it wanted the benefit of the Delhi HC’s reasoning before considering the matter. Read SCO’s report of the hearing. (https://bit.ly/3OnJTIK) 👮🏾Yesterday, the SC adjourned the challenge to Rakesh Asthana’s appointment as Delhi Police Commissioner once again. Mr. Asthana is set to retire on July 31st which may make the case infructuous. The Center for Public Interest Litigation argues that his appointment violates the SCs decisions from 2006 and 2019 regarding political interference in police affairs. SCO reported on the issues brought to the fore by Mr. Asthana’s appointment. (https://bit.ly/3yQfSM2) 📧 Have you subscribed to SCO Desk Briefs yet? Click on the link to receive updates on the Supreme Court straight to your inbox! (https://bit.ly/3PlTBME)

✨ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 🕌 Yesterday the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the practice of _Talaq-E-Hasan_, where a Muslim man can divorce his wife by uttering the word ‘_talaq_’ once a month, for three months. The practice has been challenged for being arbitrary, irrational, and for violating fundamental rights. In August 2017, a 3:2 majority of the SC held the practice of Triple Talaq or _Talaq-e-Biddat_ unconstitutional, on similar grounds. The Court is set to hear the petition on July 22nd. SCO reported on the hearings in the Triple Talaq challenge here (https://bit.ly/3ciZSdQ). 📄 Following the striking down of Triple Talaq, several Muslim women filed PILs challenging the constitutionality of polygamy, _nikah halala_ and other Muslim marriage practices before the SC. Some of these petitioners also seek that the Court criminalise Triple Talaq, polygamy and other Muslim marriage practices. Read more about the pending petitions before the SC here (https://bit.ly/3uRS0Xd). 💍 The demand for a Uniform Civil Code has been pending before the Court on various aspects, including Divorce, Maintenance & Alimony Laws (https://bit.ly/3PaiKKB), Succession and Inheritance (https://bit.ly/3RKeFi3), Marriage Age (https://bit.ly/3RHizbl) and Adoption and Guardianship (https://bit.ly/3aPJ3XB). The petitions seek uniform laws for these subjects, disregarding the religion or gender of the persons involved. SCO is tracking these cases at the Supreme Court.

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day. 🗓️ An SC Bench led by Chief Justice Ramana is scheduled to hear petitions surrounding Maharashtra's political crisis on Wednesday, July 20th. What is the conflict between the Uddhav Thackarey and Eknath Shinde factions of the Shiv Sena that have led to these cases? Read SCO Shorts for a quick refresher. (https://bit.ly/3IKuwc2) ❓The petitions raise some vital questions about the way Legislative Assemblies function. Can a Speaker suspend MLAs while a no-confidence motion is pending against the Speaker himself? Can members disqualified for defection vote in a floor test? SCO reviews the Court's existing Judgments on political defections here. (https://bit.ly/3J0jzUd) ⏪ A Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala heard the Maharashtra case over the vacation. They refused to intervene in the pending questions, allowing the disqualified members to vote in the floor test. Before the floor test could be conducted, the Uddhav Thackarey government resigned. SCO's court-side hearing report tells you all you need to know about the case at the SC so far. (https://bit.ly/3RH18aP)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads of the day: ⚖️ Yesterday, Justice U.U. Lalit commenced hearings at 9:30AM, an hour earlier than usual. He stated that Courts should sit early everyday, ideally at 9am. Justice Lalit is the next in line to be the Chief Justice of India and will be influential in shaping Court procedure. SCO reports on who the next 9 CJIs will be, if the norm of seniority is followed. (https://bit.ly/3o3KrsJ) 👨‍⚖️ Justice Lalit is set to become the next Chief Justice after CJI Ramana retires on August 26th 2022. He is one of the few Judges to be elevated directly from the Bar to the SC Bench. SCO’s profile of Justice Lalit explores his tenure at the SC. (https://bit.ly/3o69BGS) 💸 On July 15th, Justice Khanwilkar remarked that the Judgment on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is “almost ready”. Several challenges were filed against the controversial Act claiming that the Act granted the Enforcement Directorate unregulated investigatory powers. SCO breaks down the different claims made in the case through an arguments matrix. (https://bit.ly/3AYxXdo)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s Must reads for the day: 🕌 Yesterday, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) filed a petition to become a party in the challenge to the constitutionality of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 (PoW Act). BJP leader and SC advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay filed a petition challenging the PoW Act in October last year. The AIMPLB called Upadhyay’s challenge ‘mischevious’ in their petition, stating that it could have dire consequences for public order and peace, pointing to the communal riots that took place after the Babri Masjid demolition in Mumbai. Read SCO’s coverage of the challenge to the PoW Act. (https://bit.ly/3uIz39e) 👨🏾‍⚖️In their petition, the AIMPLB claimed that the PoW Act was meant to put an end to ‘ancient and stale’ claims relating to places of worship. In the Ayodhya dispute the SC had held that the PoW Act was meant to ensure history could not be used as a basis to start new conflicts over places of worship. However, on May 20th Justice Chandrachud allowed a survey to be conducted to determine the religious character of the Gyanvapi Mosque, effectively opening the POW Act to reconsideration. SCO covered the possible consequences of the SC adopting divergent stances regarding the PoW Act. (https://bit.ly/3cecTW4) ⌚ The Varanasi District Court continued to hear the plea filed by five Hindu women seeking permission to pray at the Gyanvapi Mosque site on July 13th. The women claim the Mosque was built on the ruins of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple after it was demolished by the Mughal Emperor Aurangazeb in 1669. SCO’s timeline explains the legal and historical threads that led to the current dispute. (https://bit.ly/3zer2M9)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s Must reads for the day: 👨🏻‍⚖️ The Supreme Court reportedly delivered 41 judgments on Monday, the first day of its return from the summer vacation. 20 of these judgments were written by Justice M.R Shah. Including this post-vacation high, Justice Shah has written over 400 judgments in his SC tenure so far. SCO’s profile on Justice Shah discusses his notable judgments (https://bit.ly/3nYDSay) 🧕🏽 Yesterday, Chief Justice N.V. Ramana stated that the Court would hear the challenge to the Hijab Ban next week. On March 15th the Karnataka High Court upheld a Karnataka Government Order that effectively banned hijabs in government colleges. Immediately the aggrieved students appealed the High Court’s decision. The case had been repeatedly brought before the SC in March and April to no avail. SCO reported on every hearing before the HC here (https://bit.ly/3uKawAC) 📧 Sign up to SCO’s Desk Briefs to receive updates on the Supreme Court straight to your inbox! (https://bit.ly/3PlTBME)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for the day: 👴 On both parties' request, the Court delayed hearings in 83 year old undertrial prisoner Varavara Rao's permanent medical bail application to next week. Rao, along with many other activists, has been in jail for 2 years for his involvement in the Elgar Parishad, which allegedly caused the Bhima Koregaon violence in 2018. The SC delivered a split Judgment in 2018, dismissing a petition challenging the activists' arrest as arbitrary. Visit SCO's Bhima Koregaon case archive for more details (https://bit.ly/3NWspDa) 👨‍⚖Rao was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The Act has notoriously strict guidelines for bail. While granting Rao temporary bail in 2021, the Bombay High Court relied on the SC's decision in _KA Najeeb_. Here, the SC delineated the duty of a constitutional court to grant bail even under the UAPA's strict provisions if the arrest violates the accused's fundamental rights. SCO reviews the trajectory of the SC's Judgments on bail under UAPA here (https://bit.ly/3yADLqO) ❕The Delhi Government mentioned the case regarding the dispute for control over the capital's civil servants between itself and the Union before the Chief Justice yesterday. Dr. A.M. Singhvi, appearing for Delhi, said the matter needs urgent resolution. CJI Ramana agreed. This may be the only Constitution Bench the Chief Justice forms in his tenure. Catch up on the case so far. (https://bit.ly/3Pp9wtK)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads of the day: ⚖️ The Supreme Court has returned in full swing after six long weeks. The SC’s Vacation Benches had their hands full in June with various matters ranging from Maharashtra’s political crisis to the long awaited Gujarat Riots Judgment. July promises to be an action filled month as well, with a host of important matters awaiting the Court's judgment. Find out more about upcoming hearings at the Court in our latest newsletter here: (https://bit.ly/3AKSsKv) 📰 Political defections have once more come to the forefront in light of recent developments in the Maharashtra State Assembly. Despite the former Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray having stepped down to make way for a new government, multiple petitions remain pending before the SC regarding the disqualification of the rebel MLA’s. What has the SC held in the past regarding political defections? SCO records key decisions on defections. (https://bit.ly/3ayt5Rl) 💸 Justice Khanwilkar is set to retire this month after having served a 6-year tenure. Khanwilkar J’s Bench is expected to decide on the challenges to the controversial Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, before his retirement. The judgment will decide the fate of over 100 petitions including several filed by prominent political figures from across the country. SCO reports on the pending challenges: (https://bit.ly/3uGH8v3)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads for the day: 👩🏾‍⚖️ After a six-week summer vacation, the Supreme Court resumes full-functioning today (July 11th). 💼 The ongoing tussle for administrative control over Delhi's civil servants between the Union Government and the Government of NCT Delhi was referred to a Constitution Bench before the vacation. It is likely to be heard soon. This will be the first Constitution bench convened during CJI Ramana’s tenure. Keep an eye on SCO’s Case Background to read our report of the hearing. (https://bit.ly/3nSZvcl) 💬 The challenge to the constitutionality of the law on sedition is set to be heard soon as well—currently listed for July 18th. The case was last heard on May 6th, when the Union Government approached the Court stating that they would re-examining the law. The Court delivered an Order stating they ‘hoped and expected’ that the law on sedition would not be applied while the Union was re-examining it. Visit SCO’s case archive to catch up on the on the case so far. (https://bit.ly/3ItZ7up) 🚨 The clock is ticking on the challenge to Rakesh Asthana’s appointment as Delhi Police Commissioner. He is set to retire from the position on July 31st. The case has been adjourned over 10 times and his retirement would make it infructuous. The Centre for Public Interest Litigation challenged Mr. Asthana’s appointment stating that it contradicted the SC’s past decisions on the appointment of State Police Chiefs and their tenure. Find all the details, as well as a concise summary of the Writ Petition, on SCO’s Case Background. (https://bit.ly/3yUWv5B)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads for the day: 🧑🏻‍⚖️ On Monday (July 11th) the SC will return from its summer vacation. Judges of the vacation Bench scheduled hearings in two controversial events in June to be heard on the first day back from the break. The two cases to look out for on Monday include the challenges to the Agnipath Scheme and the call for the floor test by the Governor of Maharashtra. 💰 The Agnipath Scheme was introduced on June 14th, which received severe criticism for depriving young soldiers of pensions and job security. A Vacation Bench of the SC comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia heard the petition challenging the constitutionality of the scheme. Stating that Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, must admit the case they listed the case for the first day back after the summer vacation. Read SCO’s case background and Court-side reports of the hearings here (https://bit.ly/3abdAyT) 🗳 On June 29th, the SC dealt a major blow to the Maha Vikas Aghadi coalition when a vacation bench refused to stay the floor test called by the Governor of Maharashtra. Minutes after the Order was issued, Mr. Uddhav Thackarey resigned as Chief Minister. As the month ended, the leader of the 16 rebel MLAs of the Shiv Sena, Mr. Eknath Shinde, took oath as the Chief Minister. Mr. Thackarey has filed a petition challenging the Governor’s call for a floor test and his decision to invite rebel MLA Eknath Shinde to form the new government. The Court will hear the Maharashtra political crisis on July 11th. SCO’s report explains the arguments made so far in the challenge to the floor test. (https://bit.ly/3y4dWPB)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO's must reads for the day: 🗓️ Supreme Court Judges are preparing to return from their six week summer vacation on Monday. In July, the Court is likely to see some institutional changes, crucial hearings on the Agnipath scheme and Maharashtra political crisis, an important Judgment on money laundering offences and more. Read more (https://bit.ly/3uA26fg) 🗳️ On July 6th, Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Krishna Murari refused to grant the State of Goa additional time to complete local polls. Delays in municipal and rural elections have been a major cause for concern at the SC in 2022. Most notably, the Court has come down heavily on Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra for delaying local polls in an attempt to secure their OBC reservations policies. SCO's court-side report tells you the full story. (https://bit.ly/3Pa7DRj) 📧 SCO is offering an internship opportunity for an in-person Court Reporter in Delhi for August 2022. Interested 4th and 5th year law students (2nd and 3rd year for 3-year law courses) may submit their CV, cover letter and writing samples to admin@scobserver.in. Apply Now!

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads of the day: 💻 On July 5th, Twitter filed a suit against the Indian government before the Karnataka HC challenging orders to take down posts under the new IT Rules. Several challenges have already been filed against the controversial rules with the Bombay, Madras and Kerala High Courts having already stayed their application. In July 2021, the Union filed a petition to transfer all pending proceedings before the Supreme Court. SCO reports: (https://bit.ly/3NR0EvA) 👮 Delhi Police Commissioner, Rakesh Asthana, is set to retire in just 20 days on July 27th. Mr. Asthana was set to retire on July 31st last year, when the Union relaxed the rules to extend his tenure by one year. His appointment was challenged on the grounds that it violates established norms on political interference in police affairs. The challenge now runs the risk of becoming infructuous if the case is not decided before his retirement. SCO reports on the implications of Mr. Asthana’s appointment on police reforms in India: (https://bit.ly/3AMkC8b) 📧 SCO is offering an internship opportunity for an in-person Court Reporter in Delhi for August 2022. Interested 4th and 5th year law students (2nd and 3rd year for 3-year law courses) may submit their CV, cover letter and writing samples to admin@scobserver.in. Apply Now!

🌞Good morning! Here are SCO’s must-reads for today: 👨🏾‍⚖️ On July 4th, Justice H.P. Sandesh of the Karnataka HC said he was threatened with a transfer to a different High Court for criticising the Anti-Corruption Bureau while hearing a bail petition. Transfers of judges are often seen as a way to ‘punish’ them. SCO traced the reasons given for HC judge transfers by the collegium between 2017 and 2021 and reported on other instances of controversial transfers. (https://bit.ly/3bO5qwE) ⛓️ On July 3rd, activist Teesta Setalvad and former Gujarat state DGP R.B. Sreekumar were placed in judicial custody. They were arrested on June 25th and the FIRs registered against them directly quoted the SC’s Judgment in the Zakia Jafri case. Over 300 former judges, activists and advocates wrote a letter asking CJI Ramana to clarify that the Judgment was not meant to have ‘adverse consequences’. SCO reported on the arrests and the circumstances surrounding them. (https://bit.ly/3bLlUWl) 🪖 On July 4th the Supreme Court listed another plea challenging the Agnipath recruitment scheme to the armed forces. The plea was filed by 31 Air Force aspirants who argued that the scheme should not apply to those who are currently undergoing the selection process. To find out more about why multiple constitutional challenges have been filed against the Agnipath scheme, visit our case background. (https://bit.ly/3AxWgil)

🌞Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads for today: 📁 Yesterday the SC agreed to hear the challenge to the Agnipath Scheme, subject to approval by the Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana. Announced in June this year, the scheme is aimed at recruiting young candidates to serve in the armed forces for four years, after which only 25% of will be selected for permanent recruitment. Three separate Public Interest Litigation (PIL) suits have been filed in the Supreme Court. SCO’s case background explains everything you need to know about the petitions pending in Court. (https://bit.ly/3abdAyT) 📖 Meanwhile, CJI Ramana spoke to the Indian diaspora at an event in San Francisco this Saturday, and promoted the need for a thriving constitutional culture in India. He lamented that many still do not know the distinct and impartial role of the judiciary—the party in power relentlessly seeks the SC’s endorsement of every governmental action, and the opposition expects the Court to support their cause. SCO’s profile of CJI Ramana lists the key cases before his Bench, and his most notable judgments. (https://bit.ly/3bOSKp7) 👨🏻‍⚖️ CJI Ramana is due to retire on 26th August this year, after a tenure of 8 years as a Supreme Court Judge. Who are the judges most likely to succeed him? Read SCO’s list of 9 next CJIs. (https://bit.ly/3IbIBPD)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO'S must reads for today: 💰The Ministry of Home Affairs made changes to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) and it's rules on July 1st. These changes reduce the penalty for certain offences dealing with the receipt and disclosure of foreign funds from imprisonment to fine. Earlier this year, the SC upheld another set of amendments to the FCRA which put the future of India's social sector in precarious situation. Read SCO's report here (https://bit.ly/3OF6Isk) 👨‍⚖Justice J.B. Pardiwala found himself in the eye of th storm this weekend, after commenting in Court on ex-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma's controversial comments about Islam. In a public lecture yesterday, J Pardiwala stated that personal attacks against Judges for their Judgments on social media and elsewhere are dangerous. Curious about Justice Pardiwala's career on the Bench? Read SCO's profile here ( https://bit.ly/3NEOaay) 🗓️ As the SC prepares to return from its 6 weeks long summer vacation on July 11th 2022, the stage is set for significant developments. Read more (https://bit.ly/3yEjQIB)

☀️ Good morning! Here are SCO’s must reads of the day: 🗞️ Over a month into summer vacation, the SC continued to pass decisions on ‘urgent’ matters. In the wake of the Agnipath riots and the Maharashtra political crisis, the SC has been pushed to the forefront once more with petitioners knocking on the Court’s door for a resolution. June has been marked by other notable developments as well, such as Justice Khanwilkar’s latest Judgment in the Gujarat Riots case. SCO reviews the court's activities in June: (https://bit.ly/3y9bW8J) 📺 On July 1st, a 2-Judge Bench of the SC came down heavily on former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma for her controversial comments on national TV. The Court sharply rebuked her and said she was ‘single handedly responsible for what is happening in the country’. The SC had intervened in another hate speech matter in January this year when it issued a notice in the Haridwar Dharam Sansad plea. SCO reported on the Court’s thoughts on the law governing hate speech. (https://bit.ly/3I74I9L) 🗣️ The term ‘hate speech’ is not defined in Indian law. Instead, it is punished by a framework of laws concerned with associated offences such as criminal conspiracy, sedition and blasphemy. In light of the SC’s recent remarks on politically and communally charged speech, SCO explores the Court’s evolving stance on hate speech in the political sphere (https://bit.ly/3uhln4Y)

🌞Good morning! Here are SCO's must-reads for today: ⚖️ Following the rebellion of 39 Shiv Sena members led by MLA Eknath Shinde, on June 29th, the SC concluded an unusually late Vacation Bench hearing and deciding not to intervene in the Maharashtra Governor’s call for a floor test in the State Legislative Assembly. Yesterday, Shinde was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Maharashtra. With the political landscape in Maharashtra rapidly shifting, SCO Shorts explains everything you need to know about the SC’s decision. (https://bit.ly/3Ow3iIm) ⛓️ On June 25th, activist Teesta Setalvad, former Gujarat State DGP R.B. Sreekumar were arrested after the SC held that they had ‘ulterior motives’ and attempted to ‘keep the pot boiling’ in a challenge to the SIT investigation of the 2002 Gujarat riots. The SC heard the case 15 times between November and December 2021. SCO’s court reporters covered every hearing. (https://bit.ly/3ufPlpP) 🩺 On June 30th, 82-year old activist Varavara Rao approached the SC seeking permanent bail on medical grounds. His petition stated that further incarceration would be a ‘death knell’ due to his advanced age and deteriorating health. Rao was one of five activists arrested in January 2018 under the UAPA for allegedly inciting the Bhima Koregaon violence. Read SCO’s Case Page for more. (https://bit.ly/3I6x5Vu)

🌞Good morning! Here is SCO’s update for today: The rapid developments last night in Maharashtra’a political landscape began with an unusually scheduled Supreme Court hearing. Placed before Justices Surya Kant and Pardiwala was a singular question—can the floor test be conducted before the disqualification proceedings are completed? (https://bit.ly/3y4dWPB) ⁉️ *Why did this matter?* If the floor test happens first, the rebel MLAs could vote against the MH government. If the disqualifications proceedings happen first, they would be disqualified before the floor test. 🧑🏻‍⚖️ *At the Supreme Court* When the Governor called for the floor test, the Maharashtra government approached the SC seeking urgent hearings on the ‘completely illegal’ action. The vacation Bench of Justice Surya Kant and J. Pardiwala listed the matter for 5 pm–past the usual closing time for the Court. (Justice Kant https://bit.ly/3yqfaWJ Justice Pardiwala https://bit.ly/3OvgrBC) In the hearings that went on for close to four hours, Senior Advocate Dr. A.M. Singhvi for the MH Government argued that the ‘constitutional sin’ of defection by rebel MLAs must be investigated before the floor test is conducted. Senior Advocate N.K. Kaul appearing for the rebel MLAs argued that the speaker must prove majority support before using powers to disqualify. The SC refused to stay the Maharashtra Governor’s call for a floor test. Instead, it stated that the outcome of the floor test would be subject to the outcome of the present challenge. 💥 *An Unexpected Twist* Within minutes of the Supreme Court’s decision, Mr. Uddhav Thackeray resigned on a virtual address to the public.

🌞Good morning! Here’s another key judgment from 2022. On March 31st 2022, Justices Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai declared Tamil Nadu’s 2021 Act that provided 10.5% internal reservations for Vanniyars _within_ the 20% quota for Most Backward Classes (MBC) as unconstitutional. The Court stated that reservations for Vanniyars were not based on reliable and contemporary data. (https://bit.ly/3OyXqOz) *Why it Matters* Vanniyar reservations are a key electoral issue in Tamil Nadu. Governments have promised its implementation repeatedly in election campaigns. However, other MBC groups argue that internal reservations for Vanniyars are discriminatory, as they are largely a socially and economically forward caste.   The Judgment adds to a long list of decisions since 2021 where the SC has emphasised the need for data in reservation policies. (https://bit.ly/3HZLvGX) *The Challenge* The petitioners, many of whom belonged to other MBC groups, challenged the 2021 Act on the following grounds: 1. Following the _Maratha Judgment_ in May 2021, the Tamil Nadu government lacked the legislative competence to create a new class eligible for  reservations. (https://bit.ly/3OMqEcn) 2. The reservation violated _Indra Sawhney_ (1992), where the SC barred sub-classification within backward classes for reservations.  3. There is no reliable data to show that the Vanniyars are worse off than other MBC groups. Tamil Nadu’ 2021 Act, relied on outdated and erroneous data, violates Articles 14 (Right to Equality) and 16 (Equality of Opportunity).  *What did the Court hold?* 1. TN did in fact have the legislative competence to provide internal reservations. Although the _Maratha Judgment_ took away States’ power to include new groups within reserved categories, Internal reservation merely reallocates reserved seats within predetermined groups.  2. Sub-classification within MBCs is permissible as long as the classification is based on reliable data proving relative backwardness and underrepresentation. 3. The 2021 Act granting 10.5% Vanniyar reservation was based on antiquated data from the 1980s. (https://bit.ly/3HXdxTu) *What Next?* Members of  the Vanniyar community blame present and past Tamil Nadu governments for failing to collect timely data proving the need for internal reservations. Many are still hopeful that the State Backward Castes Commission will soon collect the data required to provide the need for internal reservations for Vanniyars.  *The Bottom Line* Internal reservations for Vanniyars will be discontinued until the Tamil Nadu government finds reliable data to justify them.

☀️ Good morning! On January 31st 2022, a 3-Judge Bench of the SC delivered a clarificatory Judgment in a case pertaining to reservations in promotions. They held that States must decide the criteria for determining reservation in promotion themselves. The data collected for this purpose must be reviewed periodically. (_Jarnail Singh v Lacchmi Narain Gupta_) 🎯 *The Challenge* In 2018, the Court reduced the high burden on states to show ‘backwardness’ before introducing a reservation policy. It applied the principle of ‘Creamy Layer exclusion’, where States could not grant reservation in promotion to SC/ST individuals who belong to the creamy layer of society. However, this only caused more confusion on how to satisfy the Court’s mandate. States found that their respective High Courts were striking down the policies. Appeals filed by State govts and a group of petitions seeking clarifications on the SC’s 2018 decision came before the Court. (https://bit.ly/3xWeeb5) 🔍 *Clarifications Sought* ✓ What does inadequate representation in a class of posts mean, and how can it be proved? ✓ What does maintaining efficiency in administration mean, and how can it be guaranteed? (https://bit.ly/39Xlfka) 🗣️ *Arguments* Attorney General K.K. Venugopal informed the Bench that much of the current confusion had occurred because different States use different methods to determine ‘inadequate representation’. This meant that in some States, SC/ST candidates have to wait for years before they receive an opportunity for reservation in high ranking offices. Mr. Venugopal urged the Bench to decide which method was most efficient and order its uniform application. 👨‍⚖ *Judgment* The Court laid down that data showing ‘inadequacy of representation’ must be the basis to grant reservations to SC/STs in promotions. States must use the ‘cadre’ as the unit of collecting data on inadequacy of representation. Further, data collected for this purpose must be reviewed periodically. The period of review must be ‘reasonable’, but is left to the Govt to determine. (https://bit.ly/3bsS4pq) 🧾 *What does it mean?* The SC’s 2022 decision appears to leave States to devise their own ways to collect data on inadequacy of representation. States are still unsure, seek further clarity from the SC. This delay could mean that the intended beneficiaries of the policy will lose out on its benefits.