Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear petitions seeking to reconsider its October 17 verdict on same-sex marriages, as the petitioners sought an open court hearing on the matter. The earlier verdict had refused same-sex marriages in the country and left the decision to Parliament.
As senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the petitioners, mentioned the matter before a bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, the bench said it will look into the plea.
Rohatgi told the bench that the review plea needed to be heard in open court to redress the grievances of those seeking validation for same-sex marriages. He said the open court hearing was tentatively listed on November 28.
“Let it not be deleted. Both views, majority or minority, (in the previous bench) have held that there is a discrimination (against LGBTQ+ couples). If there is discrimination, there also has to be a remedy. This is why we have pressed for an open court hearing,” he said.
The CJI replied that he has not examined the review petition. “Let me circulate it (among judges of that constitution bench),” he said. According to Supreme Court procedures, the pleas seeking review of a judgment is considered by judges concerned in their chambers, with no oral submissions from lawyers. However, review pleas in exceptional cases, including the one pertaining to handing down the death penalty, are heard in an open court.
The latest review plea was filed by Udit Sood, one of the 21 petitioners, in the first week of November, assailing the judgment. It said the judgment acknowledged the discrimination against queer couples but “turned them away with best wishes for the future”.
On October 17, discussions on the recognition of same-sex marriages and such couples’ rights of adoption had reached a legal conundrum in SC, after which the five-judge bench led by the CJI announced 3:2 verdict, which did not favour the queer couples. Instead, it left it for the Parliament to decide.
The bench refused to either strike down the constitutional validity of the Special Marriage Act or read words into the Act because of its “institutional limitations” while declining the right of adoption to the LGBTQIA+ community.
Also in top court
Centre told to set up fresh delimitation commissionThe Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre to set up a fresh delimitation commission to ensure a proportional representation of the communities specified as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, as mandated under the Constitution. The bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, however, said that it cannot direct Parliament to amend or make laws for giving proper representation to other communities that form part of the STs, as that would amount to “venturing into the legislative domain”.
States given ‘last chance’ to clear salary dues of lower court judgesThe apex court granted a last opportunity to the defaulting states and Union Territories on Thursday to clear the salary arrears and other dues of lower court judges in accordance with the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission. A three-judge bench noted that some states have not complied with its directions dated May 19 in the matter. “We direct that the directions shall be effected on or before December 8, failing which the chief secretaries of all defaulting states and UTs shall personally be present before this court,” it said. Follow channel on WhatsApp
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear petitions seeking to reconsider its October 17 verdict on same-sex marriages, as the petitioners sought an open court hearing on the matter. The earlier verdict had refused same-sex marriages in the country and left the decision to Parliament.
As senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the petitioners, mentioned the matter before a bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, the bench said it will look into the plea.
Rohatgi told the bench that the review plea needed to be heard in open court to redress the grievances of those seeking validation for same-sex marriages. He said the open court hearing was tentatively listed on November 28.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
“Let it not be deleted. Both views, majority or minority, (in the previous bench) have held that there is a discrimination (against LGBTQ+ couples). If there is discrimination, there also has to be a remedy. This is why we have pressed for an open court hearing,” he said.
The CJI replied that he has not examined the review petition. “Let me circulate it (among judges of that constitution bench),” he said. According to Supreme Court procedures, the pleas seeking review of a judgment is considered by judges concerned in their chambers, with no oral submissions from lawyers. However, review pleas in exceptional cases, including the one pertaining to handing down the death penalty, are heard in an open court.
The latest review plea was filed by Udit Sood, one of the 21 petitioners, in the first week of November, assailing the judgment. It said the judgment acknowledged the discrimination against queer couples but “turned them away with best wishes for the future”.
On October 17, discussions on the recognition of same-sex marriages and such couples’ rights of adoption had reached a legal conundrum in SC, after which the five-judge bench led by the CJI announced 3:2 verdict, which did not favour the queer couples. Instead, it left it for the Parliament to decide.
The bench refused to either strike down the constitutional validity of the Special Marriage Act or read words into the Act because of its “institutional limitations” while declining the right of adoption to the LGBTQIA+ community.
Also in top court
Centre told to set up fresh delimitation commission
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre to set up a fresh delimitation commission to ensure a proportional representation of the communities specified as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, as mandated under the Constitution. The bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, however, said that it cannot direct Parliament to amend or make laws for giving proper representation to other communities that form part of the STs, as that would amount to “venturing into the legislative domain”.
States given ‘last chance’ to clear salary dues of lower court judges
The apex court granted a last opportunity to the defaulting states and Union Territories on Thursday to clear the salary arrears and other dues of lower court judges in accordance with the recommendations of the Second National Judicial Pay Commission. A three-judge bench noted that some states have not complied with its directions dated May 19 in the matter. “We direct that the directions shall be effected on or before December 8, failing which the chief secretaries of all defaulting states and UTs shall personally be present before this court,” it said. Follow channel on WhatsApp
