The Week That Was: The Supreme Court of India

A languid pace marked this past week at the Supreme Court of India, with not too many important matters taken up. Of course, with just weeks away for CJI Thakur to retire, there are more than a few judgments to be delivered. And thus, the countdown begins..Read the highlights from the week below..Monday, December 5.“Palace rent not taxable”, says Supreme Court.Income earned by former rulers of a princely state or their heirs, by renting out a portion of the residential palace, is not taxable. The apex court also rapped the Income Tax department for pursuing a case despite their income being exempted under IT law..A bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Abhay Manohar Sapre allowed a plea of the ruler of the former princely state of Kota, now a part of Rajasthan, challenging the high court order for bringing his income from rent in the Income Tax net..Read the full story here..Common Cause challenges appointment of CBI’s Acting Director.The NGO Common Cause has sought the appointment of a regular CBI Director and the quashing of the appointment of Rakesh Asthana as the investigating agency’s acting Director..In a petition drawn by advocate Pranav Sachdeva and filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan the petitioner has set out the importance of CBI as the “premier investigating agency of the country”..Read the full story here..Tuesday, December 6.Who has the power to grant minority status to educational institution? .The court will decide whether the National Commission for Minority Education Institution (Commission) has the power to grant ‘minority status’ to an educational institution..Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy issued notice in an appeal filed by the Commission against a judgment of the Calcutta High Court. The crux of the matter is whether the Commission is empowered under the Act to grant ‘minority status’ to education institutions or whether its powers are merely appellate in nature..Read the full story here..Wednesday, December 7.Azam Khan’s apology rejected.After infamously failing to respond to the Court’s previous notice, an ‘apology’ tendered by the Samajwadi Party’s (SP) Azam Khan – for calling a gang-rape incident “a political conspiracy” – was rejected by the court because it felt that it “was not an unconditional apology”..The Supreme Court said it would examine whether “remorse”, which is the word used by the SP strongman in his affidavit, is sufficient for tendering an unconditional apology. The court then scheduled the next hearing for December 15..Thursday, December 8.Apex Court berates lack of Court infrastructure in Jammu and Kashmir .The Apex Court, after cracking down on the functioning of State Consumer Forums, has reprimanded the State for not fulfilling its obligations towards judicial infrastructure..A Bench presided by Chief Justice TS Thakur has noted in a judgment that,.“The need to facilitate the proper functioning of the High Court and the district judiciary is a constitutional necessity which imposes a non-negotiable obligation on the state government to create an adequate number of posts and to provide sufficient infrastructure. The state government is to blame for the unfortunate situation which has resulted in a large number of persons being recruited on a daily wage basis.”.Read the full story here..Friday, December 9.Ruling on the Supreme Court’s power to hear the Cauvery dispute.The Supreme Court has upheld its constitutional power to hear the appeals filed by Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala against the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal final award in 2007. It refused the Centre’s claim that the apex court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the appeals. A three-judge Bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra said it would continue to hear the case..National Anthem order modified by the Court.The Supreme Court issued certain clarifications with respect to its order dated November 30, relating to the playing of the National Anthem in cinema halls. It stated that the doors of the cinema halls must not be bolted, and that physically handicapped people do not need to stand up for it..Read the full story here..Issue of demonetization stands reduced to 11 questions of law.A Bench of Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud noted down issues to be considered by the court. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal and Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi suggested most of the issues which the Court could consider for framing issues..Read the full story here..Rajeev Dhavan appears for Justice Katju.Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan mentioned the Justice Katju contempt matter before Justice Gogoi, and suggested that the retired judge was ready to tender an unconditional apology, and therefore the case might be dropped. Dhavan also stated that the widespread reporting of the case had only served to worsen matters, and made a slightly vague suggestion that the case should not get any more publicity than it already has..The Court will, in addition to the allegations of contempt, also look into Justice Katju’s request to be exempted from personal appearance. .Read the full story here.