Centre moves SC seeking review of judgement setting aside law on Maratha reservation ANI | Updated: May 13, 2021 22:26 IST
New Delhi [India], May 13 (ANI): The Central government on Thursday filed a review petition before the Supreme Court urging it to review its judgement where it unanimously declared a Maharashtra law which provided reservation benefits to the Maratha community, taking the quota limit in the state above 50 per cent, as unconstitutional. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has pronounced Judgement dated May 5, in the matter of Shiv Sangram v/s Union of India and other various civil appeals involving interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution 102nd Amendment Act, 2018. As provided in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, a review petition for review of the judgement of the Supreme Court has been filed by the Union of India on May 13, stated the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in a release.
Can a person who lost election be appointed as chief minister?
Is there any legal or constitutional bar in a person who lost election becoming Chief Minister? This column attempts to discuss the law and precedents in this regard.
By News Desk| Updated: 4th May 2021 4:57 pm IST Photo: Mamata Banerjee
She is reportedly going to swear in as the Chief Minister of the state.
Is there any legal or constitutional bar in a person who lost election becoming Chief Minister? This column attempts to discuss the law and precedents in this regard.
Article 164 of the Constitution deals with appointment of Chief Minister and other ministers. It reads as follows:
SC to pronounce judgment on Maratha quota on Wednesday
File Photo
The Supreme Court will pronounce its judgment on Wednesday on a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the
Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, which extends reservation to the Maratha community in public education and employment.
The judgment will be delivered by a Constitution bench of Justices
Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer, Hemant Gupta and
S Ravindra Bhat. The court had reserved its judgement in the matter on March 26, 2021. A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had in
Indra Sawhney case held that Article 16(4) of the Constitution does not confer reservation in promotions, but only reservation in appointments.