Stories
SC Urges CJI to Form Permanent Five-Judge Bench for Constitutional Issues
- •The Supreme Court flagged "inordinate delay" in resolving references to larger benches, calling it a "source of institutional embarrassment."
- •Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma requested the Chief Justice of India to explore forming a permanent five-judge constitution bench.
- •The observations arose from split opinions on referring pleas challenging the 2023 law excluding the CJI from the CEC/EC selection panel to a larger bench.
- •The bench highlighted that pendency of references for 5 to 20 years or more "does not reflect well on the institution" and requires urgent attention.
- •The court noted that a nine-judge bench recently took nine years to decide a reference on the Industrial Disputes Act, with the matter pending for 15 years prior.
Key Questions Answered
The Supreme Court flagged inordinate delays in resolving references made to larger benches as an institutional embarrassment, noting that such references often remain pending for anywhere between five to twenty years or more.
Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma delivered a split opinion on whether pleas challenging the 2023 law, which excludes the CJI from the panel selecting the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, should be referred to a larger bench.
The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, excludes the CJI from the selection panel responsible for appointing election commissioners, replacing that role with a union cabinet minister.
