The Supreme Court today recalled its 2013 judgment by which it had quashed the National Eligibility Entrance Test as unconstitutional..A 5-judge Bench presided by Justice Anil Dave passed this order today, while allowing the review petitions and directing that the matter be heard afresh. Justice Dave had provided a dissenting opinion in the 2013 judgment..In today’s order, the Court has stated that said majority judgment of 2013 had not considered certain binding precedents and there was no discussion among the members of the Bench before pronouncement of judgment..“Suffice it is to mention that the majority view has not taken into consideration some binding precedents and more particularly, we find that there was no discussion among the members of the Bench before pronouncement of the judgment.”.The court ruled that judgment delivered in 2013 needs reconsideration but refrained from giving reasons ..“We do not propose to state reasons in detail at this stage so as to see that it may not prejudicially affect the hearing of the matters.”.The 2013 judgment, delivered by 3-judge Bench, had created controversy following an article by advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan published on Bar & Bench. The article, published before the judgement was pronounced, had correctly predicted the eventual outcome in the matter..The article had led to various allegations against then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir, who had written the majority opinion. CJI Kabir maintained that he had absolutely no knowledge that the judgment had been leaked..Images from the Supreme Court of India website.
The Supreme Court today recalled its 2013 judgment by which it had quashed the National Eligibility Entrance Test as unconstitutional..A 5-judge Bench presided by Justice Anil Dave passed this order today, while allowing the review petitions and directing that the matter be heard afresh. Justice Dave had provided a dissenting opinion in the 2013 judgment..In today’s order, the Court has stated that said majority judgment of 2013 had not considered certain binding precedents and there was no discussion among the members of the Bench before pronouncement of judgment..“Suffice it is to mention that the majority view has not taken into consideration some binding precedents and more particularly, we find that there was no discussion among the members of the Bench before pronouncement of the judgment.”.The court ruled that judgment delivered in 2013 needs reconsideration but refrained from giving reasons ..“We do not propose to state reasons in detail at this stage so as to see that it may not prejudicially affect the hearing of the matters.”.The 2013 judgment, delivered by 3-judge Bench, had created controversy following an article by advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan published on Bar & Bench. The article, published before the judgement was pronounced, had correctly predicted the eventual outcome in the matter..The article had led to various allegations against then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir, who had written the majority opinion. CJI Kabir maintained that he had absolutely no knowledge that the judgment had been leaked..Images from the Supreme Court of India website.
