Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(SC) 1626

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. SIKRI, R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos. 2357, 2358, 2359, 2360, 2361, 2362, 2363 of 2017 with Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 175 of 2016 In W.P. (Crl.) No. 539 of 1986; C.A. No. 2364 of 2017 & Crl. A. No. 277 of 2017
Decided On : 15-02-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. P.P. Rao, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, Ms. Indira Jaising, Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, Mr. Rahul Mehra, Ms. Meher Dev, Mr. Swarendu Chatterjee, Mr. Prateek Chadha, Ms. Anusha Ramesh, Ms. Neha Sangwan, Mr. Jagjit Chabra, Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Ms. Nityarama Krishnan, Ms. Subashini, Mr. Ashwath Sitaraman, Mr. Shadan Farasat, Mr. Satya Mitra, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Mr. P.S. Narsimha, Ms. V. Mohana, Ms. Binu Tamta, Ms. Madhvi Divan, Mr. P.K. Mullick, Mr. Prateek Jalan, Mr. Ritin Roy, Ms. Nidhi Khanna, Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Mr. Sidarth Luthra, Mr. Gautam K., Ms. Tara Narula, Ms. Gargi Khanna

The main legal point established in the judgment is the referral of the appeals to a Constitution Bench due to substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.

Headnote:
Article 239AA - Constitution Bench - The court decided to refer the appeals to a Constitution Bench due to substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.
Fact of the Case:

The court, during the hearing of the appeals, found that the matters involved substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:

The court decided that the appeals need to be heard by a Constitution Bench due to the substantial questions of law involved.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appeals should be heard by a Constitution Bench due to the substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India, which led them to refer the appeals to a Constitution Bench.
Final Decision: The court directed the Registry to place the papers before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constituting an appropriate Constitution Bench for the urgent hearing of the matters.

ORDER :

During the hearing of these appeals our attention is drawn to the provisions of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India. Having gone through the matters and the aforesaid provisions, we are of the opinion that these appeals need to be heard by a Constitution Bench as these matters involve substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.

2. The Registry shall accordingly place the papers before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constituting an appropriate Constitution Bench.

3. As the matters are urgent, counsel for both sides request that the Constitution Bench be constituted at an early date. Learned counsel for appellants submit that the appellants have moved applications for interim directions as well and that is another reason for urgent hearing of the matters. The parties may make a request to Hon'ble the Chief Justice in this behalf.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis