Close Menu
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
  • Lex Bulletin
    • Call for Papers
    • Conference
    • Essay Writing
    • News
    • Seminar
    • Moot Court
  • Lex Pedia
    • Lex Articles
    • Lex Review
  • Internships
    • Internship Experience
    • Internship Opportunities
  • Career
    • Career Advice
    • Career Opportunities
  • Courses
    • Classroom Courses
    • Distance Courses
    • Online Courses
  • International Events
  • Videos
  • Misc
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Friday, February 13
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Our Team
    • Campus Ambassadors
  • News
  • Lex Pedia
    • Lex Articles
    • Lex Review
  • Lex Bulletin
    • Call for Papers
    • Courses
    • Career
    • Internships
    • Interviews
    • CLAT
    • MUN
  • YouTube
  • News
  • Work With Us
  • Contribute
    • Log In
LawLex.OrgLawLex.Org
The Hon’ble Supreme Court declines to entertain PILs against NJAC

The Hon’ble Supreme Court declines to entertain PILs against NJAC

0
By Harshit Manaktala on Aug 25, 2014 Lex Bulletin, News
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

 

 

Declining to entertain a batch of petitions challenging the 121st constitutional amendment and the NJAC bill, a three-judge bench headed by Justice A R Dave said the PILs are “premature” and allowed the petitioner to approach the court at a later stage.

 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India turned down the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).

Holding the petitions to be premature, the 3 judge bench-comprising of Justice Anil R. Dave, Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Jasti Chelameswar stated that it is not the right stage to address the issues.

“We are of the view that the petitions are premature. It’s open for the petitioners to approach the court at later stage on the same ground,” the bench said.

Four PILs had been filed in the apex court for declaring the NJAC move as unconstitutional, days after Parliament passed two bills to scrap the collegium system for appointments in higher judiciary and to provide a new mechanism in its place.

The PILs had been filed by former Additional Solicitor General Bishwajit Bhattacharya, advocates R K Kapoor and Manohar Lal Sharma and Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association.

For more information visit www.thehindu.com

 

 

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Call for Blogs
Call for Blogs
Support Us

Please enter a description

USD

Please enter a price

Please enter an Invoice ID

WRITE A CASE SUMMARY
CATEGORIES
Recent Posts
  • When Code Meets Courtroom: AI in the Indian Legal System
  • CASE COMMENT: INDRA SAWHNEY v. UNION OF INDIA
  • The MSEFC and Arbitration Paradox: Structural Bottlenecks and the Digital Path to Reform
  • Winner Announcement- Blog Writing Competition by LawLex
  • Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions: From 2012 Norms to 2025 Draft Regulations

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stories handpicked for you.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and won't spam you

Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved. For collaborations contact mail.lawlex@gmail.com

All Rights Reserved!
  • Front Page
  • About Us
  • Advertising
  • Calendar
  • Contribute
  • Lawlex Campus Ambassadors
  • Lawlex YT Channel
  • Log In
  • Newsletter
    Featured
    Recent

    When Code Meets Courtroom: AI in the Indian Legal System

    Feb 13, 2026

    CASE COMMENT: INDRA SAWHNEY v. UNION OF INDIA

    Feb 12, 2026

    The MSEFC and Arbitration Paradox: Structural Bottlenecks and the Digital Path to Reform

    Feb 11, 2026
  • Our Team
  • Privacy Policy
  • Register
  • Support Us
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Work With Us
  • Your Profile

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.