i. Arguments begin on the validity of quota for economically weaker upper castes– The Supreme Court has been hearing arguments challenging the 103rd Constitutional amendment, which granted the EWS or Economically Weaker Section reservation in government jobs and colleges. In response to claims that the quota was against the basic structure of the Constitution, the Government argued that if a provision impinged on a feature of an article of the Constitution, it did not mean that it was against the basic structure. The provisions rather were in conformity with affirmative action. The government also defended the articles on the count of breaching the 50 per cent ceiling set by Indra Sahwney. It claimed that the cap only applied to reservations made under 15(4), (5) and 16(4) and not on the newly inserted articles. Further, many committees have come to the conclusion that the economically weaker sections do require reservation and the same could be treated as a measure for backwardness. [Youth for Equality v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1429 of 2018]

ii. Notice issued on plea to randomly verify 50 per cent of VVPATs – The Supreme Court has issued notice on a plea by 21 leaders from different political parties to direct the Election Commission of India to verify at least 50 per cent of the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) in the upcoming 17th Lok Sabha elections. The ECI had earlier announced that it would verify VVPATs from one booth in a constituency, which, according to the petition, could be as less as 0.44 per cent of the total votes cast in the constituency. Verifying at least 50 per cent booths would ensure that the EVMs are in working order and reduce the risk of tampering. [N. Chandrababu Naidu v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 273/2019, date of order: 15.03.2019]

iii. Constitutional bench to examine whether the office of CJI comes under the purview of RTI – The Supreme Court would hear the appeal against the three judge bench order of the Delhi High Court, which had held that the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India would come under the purview of the RTI Act as ‘public authorities’. The original RTI hadbeen filed to seek information about the assets declared by the Judges of the Supreme Court. The appeal had been referred to a Constitutional bench in 2016 and now has been listed to be heard from March 27 with other matters.

iv. Preferential rights of heirs under Section 22 of Hindu Succession Act is applicable to agricultural lands as well – The Supreme Court upheld a decision of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which had held that the preferential right available to heirs under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession was not limited only to businesses or immoveable property, excluding agricultural lands. Under the section, when the property devolves and one of the heirs wants to sell their property off, the other heirs have the right to first acquire the property. The Court noted that there was no exception to the section, and overruled the judgments of the High Court which held the contrary. [Babu Ram v Santokh Singh, Civil Appeal No. 2553 of 2019, date of order: 07.03.2019]

v. Contempt order against Patricia Mukhim stayed – The Supreme Court stayed the contempt order passed against the Shillong Times Editor, Patricial Mukhim and the publisher, Sobha Chaudhari. The Court also issued notice on the SLP, filed by the two women against the said order. The two women had been found guilty of contempt by the court because of their articles criticising a sitting judge of the Meghalaya High Court, pointing out that his orders were mostly self serving. A fine of ₹2 lakhs had been imposed on them and they were ordered to sit in the corner of the court till its rising. [Shobha Chaudhari v Registrar General,Criminal Appeal No.482/2019, date of order: 15.03.2019]

vi. Life ban on Sreesanth set aside – The Supreme Court has set aside the life ban imposed on the cricketer Sreesanth, and directed the BCCI to take a fresh decision on the punishment to be imposed on him for spot fixing in the 2013 IPL. The issue has to be resolved within 3 months. The Court, though, upheld the finding of guilt by the BCCI disciplinary committee and did not make any adverse observations about the evidence or process, rather it said that the process had followed principles of natural justice. The Anti-Corruption Code allows a minimum of 5 years ban to a maximum of life ban. But the order by which a life ban was imposed on Sreesanth, the aggravating or mitigating circumstances were not detailed in order to explain the imposition of the highest penalty under the Code. [S. Sreesanth v BCCI, Civil Appeal No. 2424 of 2019, date of order: 15.03.2019]

vii. Interim stay granted to Chinmayi Sripada against expulsion from Dubbing Artists Union – A Chennai Civil Court granted Chinmayi Sripada against expulsion from the South Indian Cine Television Dubbing Artists Union. Her petition alleged that the expulsion had been ordered because she shared instances of sexual harassment that she had faced in the industry including at the hands of the Union President, Radha Ravi. The expulsion order claimed that she had not paid the subscription on time, but Chinmayi pointed out that she had become a lifetime member by paying the requisite fee, which was reflected from the records. Thus she managed to show to the court that she had a prima facie case in her favour and that she had suffered from great mental and emotional stress as she was deprived of work and so would be put to great hardship, entitling her to the injunction. [I.A. No. 2 of 2019 in Original Suit 1549 of 2019, date of order: 14.03.2019]

viii. RCom’s plea to release income tax refund lying with SBI denied – The NCLAT has refused to direct SBI to give RCom ₹260 Crores lying with it, which it is holding as the trustee of all creditors of RCom. RCom is supposed to pay ₹550 crores in total to Ericsson, which sought a stay on the insolvency proceedings initiated againstit. In the course of the proceedings it was decided that the proceedings against RCom would be stayed and it would pay the amount within 120 days. RCom defaulted on the payment leading to a contempt petition being filed and the Supreme Court found Anil Ambani guilty of contempt. Anil Ambani may now have to approach the Supreme Court for directions to SBI. [Satish Seth v Ericssion India Pvt. Ltd., Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 257-258 of 2018, date of order:15.03.2019]

ix. Discriminatory girls hostel rules struck down – The Kerala High Court struck down portions of hostel rules of Sree Kerala Varma College, which were blatantly discriminatory against the female boarders of the College. The rules barred female students to go for first or second show of a movie while no such restrictions had been placed on the boys hostel. The college was imposing its own moral choices on the students which the court did not agree with. The other provision that barred students from participating in protests, marches, meetings etc was also struck down as being violative of the fundamental right to freedom of expression. The only provision that the court upheld was one which mandated a permission from the warden if someone wanted to stay back in the hostel during the working hours of the college holding that the students who wanted to stay away from college should not be encouraged. [Anita Jose v State of Kerala, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14319 of 2019, date of order: 21.02.2019] (IPA Service)