#JudgmentReserved: In a tumultuous week, Supreme Court hears and reserves judgments in 17 cases

If you thought last week’s tumultuous events would have had an impact on the Supreme Court’s productivity, think again. In this edition of Judgment Reserved, we find that the crisis the apex court’s functionaries have been facing appears to have had little disruptive effect on its hearing and disposal of matters.

What does the data from January 4 to 12 tell us?

The Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud in Court No.1 alone heard and reserved judgments in nine cases, whereas four other benches separately heard and reserved judgments in eight cases. This, despite the fact that the CJI was the centre of the recent controversy.

The nine cases in which judgments have been reserved by the CJI-led bench are:

• Andanur Kalamma v. Gangamma (D) by LRS (2005)
• Ramrao Lala Borse v New India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2017)
• Dwarika Prasad v State of Uttar Pradesh (2016)
• M/s Neerja Realtors Pvt Ltd v Janglu (D) Thr. LR (2017)
• Saraswati Singh v Shailesh Singh (2016)
• Shri Nagar Mal v Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Through Divisional Manager (2016)
• Vijay Kumar Rastogi v UP State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Regional Manager (2017)
• Union of India v Vijendra Pal Singh (2012)
• M/s Maya Appliances (P) Ltd now known as Preethi Kitchen Appliances Pvt Ltd v Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & Others (2014).  

Except Saraswati Singh v Shailesh Singh, which is a criminal writ petition, other cases are civil SLPs, and civil appeals.

The Bench of Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan reserved judgment in Ashish Kumar v State of Uttar Pradesh, a civil appeal filed in 2013. The Bench also reserved judgment in two civil SLPs – Danamma @ Suman Surpur v. Amar, (2013) and State of Madhya Pradesh v Manoj Sharma (2013). WG. CDR. Ashwini Kumar Handa (Retd) v Union of India (2017), a civil appeal arising out of a decision of the Armed Forces Tribunal, was another matter in which the Bench concluded arguments.

The Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R Banumathi reserved judgment in ISSAC @Kishor v Ronald Cheriyan, a criminal SLP filed in 2012, and State of Himachal Pradesh v Pardeep Kumar, another criminal SLP filed in 2015.

The Bench of Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman and Navin Sinha concluded arguments in M/s Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co. Pvt. Ltd. v M/s Bhadra Products, (2017) an arbitration matter.

The Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar reserved judgment in Tripurari Sharan v Ranjit Kumar Yadav on January 4  and delivered judgment on January 11.  The judgment, authored by Justice Shantanagoudar, clarifies the law on reservations when a Meritorious Reserved Candidate (MRC) opts to migrate from the general category to the reserved category, in order to avail admission in a medical college.

The Bench held that in that event, the MRC will be counted as a general category for the purpose of reservation, and the seat vacated by him under the general category will be filled by the last eligible candidate of the reserved category who was deprived of his seat because of the migration of the MRC to the reserved category.

Of the 16 judgments delivered during this period, Justice AM Sapre authored four, Justice Deepak Gupta authored three, while Justices R Banumathi, Shantanagoudar, and Kurian Joseph authored two each. Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices L Nageswara Rao and Sanjay Kishan Kaul authored one each.