SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD ASSOCIATION AND ANR. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

Writ Petition (Civil), 13 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 07, 2015

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                         CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

                     WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.13 OF 2015

SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD
ASSOCIATION AND ANR.                                         ... PETITIONERS

                                   VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA                                                ... RESPONDENT

                                    WITH

              WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.14, 18, 23, 24,70, 83,
                              108 & 124 OF 2015

                                    WITH

                  TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO.391 OF 2015


                                  O R D E R


ANIL R. DAVE, J.

1.    In this group of petitions,  validity  of  the  Constitution  (Ninety-
Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointment  Commission
Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') has been  challenged.   The
challenge is on the ground that by virtue of the aforestated  amendment  and
enactment of the Act, basic structure of the Constitution of India has  been
altered and therefore, they should be set aside.

2.    We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the  parties  and  the
parties appearing in-person at length.

3.    It has been mainly  submitted  for  the  petitioners  that  all  these
petitions should  be  referred  to  a  Bench  of  Five  Judges  as  per  the
provisions of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of  India  for  the  reason
that substantial questions of law  with  regard  to  interpretation  of  the
Constitution of India  are  involved  in  these  petitions.    It  has  been
further submitted that till all these petitions are finally disposed of,  by
way of an interim relief it should be directed that the Act  should  not  be
brought into force and the present system  with  regard  to  appointment  of
Judges should be continued.

4.    Sum and substance of the  submissions  of  the  counsel  opposing  the
petition is that all these petitions are premature for the reason  that  the
Act has not come into force till today and till the Act  comes  into  force,
cause of action can not be said  to  have  arisen.   In  the  circumstances,
according to the learned counsel, the petitions should be rejected.

5.    The learned counsel as well as  parties  in-person  have  relied  upon
several judgments to substantiate their cases.

6.    Looking at the facts of the case,  we  are  of  the  view  that  these
petitions involve substantial questions of law as to the  interpretation  of
the Constitution of India and therefore, we direct  the  Registry  to  place
all the matters of this group before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of  India  so
that they can be placed before a larger Bench for its consideration.
7.    As we are not deciding the  cases  on  merits,  we  do  not  think  it
appropriate to discuss the submissions made by the learned counsel  and  the
parties in-person.

8.    It would be open to the petitioners  to  make  a  prayer  for  interim
relief before the larger bench as we do not think it  appropriate  to  grant
any interim relief at this stage.



                              .............................................J
                                                              (ANIL R. DAVE)



                              .............................................J
                                                            (J. CHELAMESWAR)



                           ................................................J
                                                            (MADAN B. LOKUR)
NEW DELHI,
APRIL 07, 2015.