"On one hand you want an urgent hearing. Then you don't want virtual courts too. Then let us close down virtual courts too" - This was justice L. Nageswara Rao of Apex Court snapping at Advocates during the hearing of petitions challenging Maratha quota in jobs & educational institutions.

This happened on 2 occasions during the Supreme Court hearing on Wednesday.

FIRST OCCASION

Lawyer Shivaji Jadhav: Virtual hearing is not possible..documents run to thousands of pages.

Justice Rao said, "Ok. You want urgent hearing.. then say it is not possible through the virtual court. When do you think Covid-19 will subside & regular courts will start? What is your estimate...At least we have no idea".

The lawyer had no clear answer.

SECOND OCCASION

Another Advocate insists on open Court hearing through regular system saying lawyers are not able to argue properly or are sometimes muted, or cut short.

Justice Rao said, Ok. We started this system so that things keep going even during these times.  If you don't want then let us shut down virtual courts also...

The bench said it will go ahead with the virtual court & commence day to day final hearing on petitions challenging 12% Maratha reservation in jobs & educational admissions in Maharashtra from July 27 through video conference.

SC refused to issue any interim orders.

On July 12, 2019, the Apex Court issued notice to the Govt. of Maharashtra on 2 pleas challenging the June 27 Bombay HC verdict upholding the Maratha reservation.

The bench was hearing 2 pleas, including one filed by J Laxman Rao Patil, challenging the Bombay HC order that upheld the constitutional validity of the quota for the Maratha community in education & government jobs in Maharashtra.

The petitioner had earlier sought a stay on the HC order as the reservation after the state decision today is at 65% in education & 62% in jobs, exceeding the 50% cap in total reservation. Pleas say the reservation quota breached the 50% ceiling on reservation fixed by the top court in its judgment in the Indira Sawhney case.

The High Court of Bombay on June 27 last year had said the 50% cap on total reservations imposed by the Top Court could be exceeded under exceptional circumstances.

Petitioners say such reservation can only be brought up by the Central Government & not the State government. They argue such a reservation will require a constitutional amendment.

Source Link

Picture Source :