Sub-classification of SCs for quota: Top court scraps pleas seeking review

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of pleas seeking review of its judgment which held that states are constitutionally empowered to make sub-classifications within the Scheduled Castes for granting reservation. A seven-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices B R Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma said there is no error apparent on the face of the record. The top court also rejected applications for listing the review petitions in open court. Justice Trivedi, who had written a separate dissenting judgment in the case, was also part of seven-judge bench which dismissed the pleas seeking review of the majority verdict. "Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013 has been established. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed," the order dated September 24, which w

Sub-classification of SCs for quota: Top court scraps pleas seeking review

Join our WhatsApp Community to receive travel deals, free stays, and special offers!
- Join Now -

Join our WhatsApp Community to receive travel deals, free stays, and special offers!
- Join Now -

The Supreme Court has dismissed a batch of pleas seeking review of its judgment which held that states are constitutionally empowered to make sub-classifications within the Scheduled Castes for granting reservation. A seven-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices B R Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma said there is no error apparent on the face of the record. The top court also rejected applications for listing the review petitions in open court. Justice Trivedi, who had written a separate dissenting judgment in the case, was also part of seven-judge bench which dismissed the pleas seeking review of the majority verdict. "Having perused the review petitions, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. No case for review under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules 2013 has been established. The review petitions are, therefore, dismissed," the order dated September 24, which w