“The world acknowledges that children in conflict with law should be treated differently than adults in conflict with law. The reason is that the mind of the child has not attained maturity and it is still developing. Therefore, the child should be tested on different parameters and should be given an opportunity of being brought into the mainstream if, during his juvenility, has acted in conflict with law.”1
Justice Vikram Nath
Career Trajectory- From Advocate to Judge of the Supreme Court
Born on 24-09-1962, Justice Vikram Nath hails from a family of lawyers with him being the 4th generation in his family to pursue law.2 He graduated in Science in the 19833 and later obtained his law degree from the University of Lucknow in 1986.4 He enrolled as an advocate on 30-03-1987 and practised as an advocate in the Allahabad High Court.5
After 17 years of practise, Justice Vikram Nath was elevated as Additional Judge of the Allahabad High Court on 24-09-2004.6 He was made a Permanent Judge of the Allahabad High Court on 27-02-2006.7
Justice Vikram Nath was recommended for first Chief Justice of new Andhra Pradesh High Court,8 following the bifurcation of a combined High Court for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Justice Nath was recommended as Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court on 22-08-2019 by the Supreme Court Collegium comprising of Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, S.A. Bobde and N.V. Ramana, JJ and after the recommendation was approved by the Ministry of Law and Justice, he took charge as 26th Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court on 10-09-20199.
Did You Know? Justice Vikram Nath was the first Chief Justice of a High Court in India to live stream Court proceedings on YouTube.10
Justice Nath was elevated to the Supreme Court on 31-08-2021 and is due to retire on 23-09-202711
Notable Judgements at Supreme Court
Did You Know? Justice Vikram Nath is likely to serve as Chief Justice of India for seven months from 10-02-2027 to 24-09-2027.12
In a batch of civil appeal and special leave petitions, the seven Judge Constitution Bench comprising of Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI, B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M. Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ., by a majority of 6:1, held that sub-classification of Scheduled Castes among reserved categories is permissible for granting separate quotas for more backwards within the SC categories. Justice Bela M. Trivedi dissented holding that such sub-classification is not permissible.
CJI Dr. DY Chandrachud penned the judgment for himself and Justice Manoj Misra, to which B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mithal, and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. agreed. However, Justice Gavai in his penned judgment held that ‘creamy layer’ principle is also applicable to SCs and STs and that the criteria for exclusion of creamy layer for the purpose of affirmative action could be different from the criteria as applicable to the Other Backward Classes. Justice Gavai’s holding was agreed upon by Justices Vikram Nath, Pankaj Mithal and Satish Chandra Sharma.
[State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1860]
While considering the instant petition filed by People’s Rights and Social Research Centre, a Delhi based NGO seeking intervention vis-a-vis addressing the grave issue of “Silicosis” among workers in various industries across the country; the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ., directed National Green Tribunal (NGT) to oversee the impact of silicosis prone industries and factories across India and ensure that the Central and State Pollution Control Boards comply with the earlier directions of the Court. The Court also directed the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to oversee the compensation process across the respective States.
[Peoples Rights & Social Research Centre v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1895]
In a review petition against order dated 24-08-2024 in XXX v. State (UT of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1062, upholding Calcutta High Court’s decision granting bail to Jitendra Narain, Former Chief Secretary of Andaman and Nicobar Islands and other co-accused persons for offences under Sections 376-D, 228-A, 506 and 120 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), the Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. dismissed the same holding that the impugned order did not suffer from any error warranting reconsideration.
In an appeal challenging the validity of the judgment passed by the Patna High Court, whereby the Division Bench of the Court dismissed both the appeals and refused to interfere with the judgment and passed by the Single Judge, pertaining to the issue of the selection and appointment to the post of City Manager under the Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale, JJ., while upholding the impugned judgment has held that as respondent 1 received 32.14 per cent, above the minimum qualifying marks of 32 per cent, as per the advertisement. Therefore, Bihar Staff Selecton Commision (‘BSSC’) were not right by denying her a place on the merit list.
[Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Hima Kumari, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1725]
Supreme Court sets aside withdrawal of prosecution of MLA accused of double murder in broad daylight
In a criminal appeal highlighting the alarming trend where cases, particularly those involving influential figures, face significant delays, obstructing the administration of justice, the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. while emphasizing the paramount importance of ensuring progression of the trial without further delay, set aside the withdrawal of prosecution of accused, an MLA, as allowed by the Trial Court. Further, the Court asked the High Court to ensure that justice is not further delayed or compromised due to political influence or any other extraneous factors.
“The judicial system of our country often finds itself grappling with the pervasive issues of prolonged delay and suspected political influence within the legal proceedings.”
[Shailendra Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1717]
In a batch of 117 petitions, including four contempt petitions filed primarily by the transporters and tour operators under Article 32 of the Constitution of India assailing the legality of different State Governments levying and collecting Authorization Fee/Border Tax in violation of All India Tourist Vehicles (Permit) Rules, 2023, (‘Rules , 2023’) the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. disposed of these petitions without interfering with the demands being raised by the State Governments while giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional High Courts for their reliefs, and said that as the State enactments, rules and regulations are not under challenge, it cannot be said that the demand of Border Tax/Authorization Fee at the borders by the respective State Governments is bad under law.
[Muthyala Sunil Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1678]
In a civil appeal filed against the judgment and order passed by the Delhi High Court, wherein the Court quashed the Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007 framed by the Chief Information Commissioner (‘CIC’) and held that the CIC has no power to constitute Benches of the Commission, the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. has set aside the impugned Judgment and upheld the CIC’s powers to frame Regulations pertaining to constitution of Benches of the Commission as such powers are within the ambit of Section 12(4) of the RTI Act.
“Administrative bodies must have the freedom to establish and implement internal procedures and regulations that best suit their unique mandates and operational needs”
[Central Information Commission v. DDA, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1696]
In a writ petition seeking direction to the Election Commission of India (‘ECI’) against hate speeches allegedly given by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Minister Anurag Thakur during the campaigns for Lok Sabha elections, the division bench of Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. has dismissed the writ petition.
In a criminal special leave to appeal by the minor girl’s father against Karnataka High Court’s decision whereby the High Court allowed the criminal appeal and granted bail to Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) case, the Division Bench comprising of Vikram Nath and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. stayed the impugned order.
[H. Ekanthaiah v. State of Karnataka, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 677]
Know why Supreme Court overturned Punjab and Haryana HC decision in IAS Ashok Khemka’s PAR case
In an appeal by State of Haryana challenging order dated 18-03-2019 passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court setting aside the order of Central Administrative Tribunal (‘CAT’), the Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. set aside the impugned judgment and directed the Chief Minister of Haryana being the Accepting Authority to decide on Underlying Representation within 60 days.
[State of Haryana v. Ashok Khemka, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 258]
In an appeal filed Madras High Court’s refusal to criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 417, 306 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) read with Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002 (‘TNPHW Act’), the division bench of Vikram Nath and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. while setting aside the impugned judgment quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused. Further, it said that the accused, by breaking up the relationship with the deceased and by advising her to marry in accordance with the advice of her parents had not intended to abet her suicide. Hence, it held that the offence under Section 306 is not made out.
[Prabhu v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 137]
In an appeal against the judgment and order passed by the Bombay High Court, whereby the appeal was dismissed, thereby confirming the order passed by the District Judge, which confirmed the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur rejecting the change report filed by the appellants, the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. while setting aside the impugned order and accepting the change report, has directed fresh elections for the new executive committee of the Society by the Charity Commissioner in accordance with law within six months from the receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Further, it held that the proviso to Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 [the Registration Act] would disentitle defaulting members from being given any notice even if their membership was not terminated or ceased.
[Babasaheb Wasade v. Manohar Gangadhar Muddeshwar, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 63]
In appeals challenging the correctness of common judgment and order passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court on 1-06-2016 raising the compensation amount to Rs 493 per square yard on date of notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘1894 Act’), the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. found the annual increase at the rate of 8% just and proper, as compared to 15% increase awarded by the High Court, due to a huge gap of 11 years.
[Central Warehousing Corpn. v. Thakur Dwara Kalan ul-Maruf Baraglan Wala, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1361]
Section 6A of DSPE Act unconstitutional from date of insertion: Supreme Court Constitution Bench
While considering whether declaration made in Subramanian Swamy v. CBI, (2014) 8 SCC 682, regarding unconstitutionality of Section 6-A of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (‘DSPE Act’) could be applied retrospectively in context of Article 20 of Constitution of India, the Constitution Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Abhay S. Oka, Vikram Nath* and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. held that its decision in Subramanian Swamy (supra) declaring Section 6-A of DSPE Act unconstitutional, shall have retrospective effect, to be ineffective from the date of its insertion.
[CBI v. R.R. Kishore, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1146]
In a batch of petitions challenging order passed by Calcutta High Court on 20-02-2023 granting bail to Jitendra Narain, Ex-Chief Secretary of Andaman and Nicobar Islands for offences under Sections 376-D, 228-A, 506 and 120 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and bail granted to two co-accused from the same First Information Report (‘FIR’), the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ refused to interfere with the impugned order and modified the conditions for grant of bail.
[XXX v. State (UT of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1062]
Supreme Court analyses application of Non Est Factum and Misrepresentation
In an appeal assailing correctness of the judgment and order passed by Madras High Court on 21-11-2008 allowing second appeal in N. Krishnasamy Mudaliar v. Ramathal, 2008 SCC OnLine Mad 864, the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. explained in detail the rule related to non est factum and misrepresentation in a document.
The Court explained the settled law that “where it is alleged that the document of sale is void, then no cancellation would be necessary and such a document can be ignored under law. Cancellation of a sale deed would be necessary only where it is alleged to be voidable on facts.” The Court explained that the fraudulant misrepresentation in the instant case was not limited to the contents but character of the document. It further pinpointed that through the instant, it was clear that plea of non est factum was well pleaded in clear and strict terms, which the High Court went wrong in recording.
[Ramathal v. K. Rajamani, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1022]
How Ex-RJD MP Prabhunath Singh was Convicted in 1995 Double Murder Case?
“The three main stake holders in a criminal trial, namely the Investigating Officer that is the part of the police of the State of Bihar, the Public Prosecutor, and the Judiciary, have all utterly failed to keep up their respective duties and responsibilities cast upon them.”, this is what the 3-judge bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath,* JJ had to say while reversing the acquittal of ex-RJD MP Prabhunath Singh in a double murder case. The Court went on to convict Prabhunath Singh under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC for committing culpable homicide amounting to murder and attempt to murder and directed him to be taken into custody and be produced before the Court on 01.09.2023 to decide the quantum of sentence.
[Harendra Rai v. State of Bihar, (2023) 9 SCC 702]
“Prosecution had failed to establish charge”; SC acquits murder convict after 15 years in prison
In an appeal against the judgment and order of Chhattisgarh High Court, whereby the conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 and the sentence to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- passed by the Additional Sessions Judge has been affirmed. the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. while acquitting the convict, said that it is possible that the deceased was heavily drunk and had fallen on a sharp-edged object because of which he had received the injury. Thus, the prosecution had failed to establish the charge.
The Court opined that once there is no eyewitness of the incident, the prosecution will have to establish a motive for the commission of the crime because in a case of direct evidence, motive may not have a major role. If there is no motive proved and there are direct eyewitnesses, motive may lose its importance, but in the present case due to absence of eyewitness, motive has an important role to play.
[Shatrughan v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 858]
In a civil appeal against dismissal of a challenge by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘NCDRC’) against order holding Indian Railways liable to pay Rs 1 lakh to the passenger whose cash was stolen while travelling by train, the Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. allowed the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the NCDRC, SCDRC and District Consumer Forum in the instant matter.
The Court, while hearing the instant matter, expressed that “We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be in any way a deficiency in service by the Railways.” The Court was of the view that the Railways could not be held responsible if a passenger was not able to protect his belongings.
[Station Superintendent v. Surender Bhola, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 741]
[Beant Singh Assassination Case] Supreme Court refuses to commute death penalty of Balwant Singh
In a Writ Petition seeking directions for commutation of death sentence of the petitioner in 1995 Bomb Blast that led to the assassination of the then Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, killed 16 others, and left several persons injured, the Bench of B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath* and Sanjay Karol, JJ. rejected the claim of inordinate delay in disposal of mercy petition for the fact that the same was not submitted by the petitioner himself. The Court pointed towards the pending matters and left it to the Executive to decide on such sensitive matters.
[Balwant Singh v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 555]
By way of a criminal appeal, the appellant challenged the order passed by the Gauhati High Court wherein the appeal was dismissed confirming the judgment passed by the Trial Court convicting the 11 out of 13 accused under Section 147, 148, 447, 323, 302 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and a fine of INR 1000/- on default of which the petitioner would have to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. While exercising its criminal appellate jurisdiction, the 3-judges bench of B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath* and Sanjay Karol, J.J., set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants. Although the death of the deceased was homicidal, but the prosecution was unable to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused appellants making them entitled to the benefit of doubt.
[Pulen Phukan v. State of Assam, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 350]
In a Civil Appeal filed by the suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor Manpasand Beverages Ltd. challenging the correctness of order dated 13-04-2021 passed by National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad Bench rejecting application under Section 12-A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for withdrawal of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, the Division Bench of B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath*, JJ. set aside the impugned NCLT order, allowed the application under Regulation 30-A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2018 and said that NCLT fell in error while taking a contrary view.
[Abhishek Singh v. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 349]
In an appeal against Himachal Pradesh High Court declaring Section 3-A(3) of Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 as ultra vires the State powers while quashing two other notifications in this regard, the bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath*, JJ. upheld the validity of the said provisions and set aside the High Court’s judgment.
The Court set aside the High Court’s order and held that the validity of Section 3-A(3) of the Act has been wrongly decided as ultra vires by the High Court. The Court clarified that the tax imposed is regulatory in nature and not a penalty. Regarding the notifications quashed by the High Court against lumpsum taxes, the Court relied upon State of T.N. v. M. Krishnappan, (2005) 4 SCC 53, wherein, levy of lumpsum taxes has been upheld by the 3-judge bench.
[State of H.P. v. Goel Bus Service, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 46]
The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath*, JJ., reversed the impugned judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Trial Court of convicting the appellant for murder on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
Noting that there were many broken links in the chain of evidence and the prosecution could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Casting a doubt on the prosecution version, the Court remarked,
“The milk which is said to be adulterated with the poison was taken out from the refrigerator, transferred into a pan for boiling, and thereafter given to the deceased. If it actually had organophosphorus in it the smell would have filled up the room. The deceased being a healthy woman aged 45 years would not have consumed it if the pungent smell was coming from the milk. Even the informant did not sense any foul smell from the milk while boiling it.”
[Rajbir Singh v. State of Punjab, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1090]
In an unfortunate incident in 2017, a class II student was found with his throat slit in the bathroom of his school. A class XI student, aged 16 years and 5 months on the date of the incident, was arrested. The Supreme Court was called upon to examine the preliminary assessment made under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath*, JJ has asked the Central Government and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights to consider issuing guidelines or directions in this regard which may assist and facilitate the Board in making the preliminary assessment under section 15 of the Act, 2015.
“A child with average intelligence/IQ will have the intellectual knowledge of the consequences of his actions. But whether or not he is able to control himself or his actions will depend on his level of emotional competence. For example, risky driving may result in an accident. But if emotional competence is not high, the urge for thrill seeking may get the better of his intellectual understanding.”
[Barun Chandra Thakur v. Bholu, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 870]
The Division Court of Vikram Nath* and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ., held that the State’s act of taking the appellants’ property, all being farmers, without compensation, was arbitrary, irrational, and a clear violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution. Since the land in question was agricultural, the Court opined that non-payment of adequate compensation would amount to a violation of the right to livelihood; a fundamental right under Article 21.
[Kalyani v. Sulthan Bathery Municipality, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 516]
In case relating to court fees, the bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath*, JJ had the occasion to explains why the legislature had left it open for the plaintiff to value his claim for the six categories of the suit falling under Section 7(iv) of the Court Fees Act, 1870.
[State of Punjab v. Dev Brat Sharma, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 330]
The 3-Judges Bench comprising of Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., set aside the seniority list prepared by the Department of Minor Irrigation, U.P. on finding the list to be in contravention of statutory mandate. The Bench stated,
“The Appointing Authority ought to have prepared a combined merit list based upon the performance or the proficiency on the basis of the marks received in the selection test as prepared by the Commission; otherwise, it would amount to denial of the right of consideration for promotion to a more meritorious candidate as against a candidate having lesser merit.”
[Ajay Kumar Shukla v. Arvind Rai, (2022) 12 SCC 579]
In the case where two different criminal appeals were being heard against two sets of accused, on account of one of them absconding, and decided against two different judgments based upon evidence recorded in separate trials, though for the commission of the same offence, the 3-judge bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath* and BV Nagarathna, has held that the Madras High Court fell into an error while passing a common judgement, based on evidence recorded in only one trial, against two sets of accused persons having been subjected to separate trials.
[AT Mydeen v. Customs Department, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1017]
Bilkis Bano’s rapists walk free: Supreme Court issues notice to Gujarat Government
When on August 15, 2022, her rapists walked out of the prison after serving 15 years’ imprisonment based on Gujarat Government’s remission policy, Bilkis Bano found herself “bereft of words” and “numb”.
The 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, CJ and Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath, JJ has issued notice to the Gujarat Government on the release of 11 men convicted for the gangrape of Bilkis Bano during the 2002 Gujarat riots. The Court has also directed that the 11 released men be impleaded as parties in the plea challenging the decision of the Gujarat Government.
[Subhashini Ali v. State of Gujarat, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1083]
With a view to bring reform in practices relating to disposal of bail applications arising from the same case, the Division Bench of Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath, JJ., held that where more than one bail application has been filed by co-accused of offences arising from self-same FIR, all such applications shall be listed before the same court to avoid disparity.
[Abhyanand Sharma v. State of Bihar, (2022) 10 SCC 819]
FIR for repeated rape cannot be filed just because a long standing relationship is no longer working out; Pre-arrest bail granted
The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, JJ has granted pre-arrest bail to a man in a case relating to the rape of the woman he had been in a relationship with for four years.
When the relationship between the bail applicant and the complainant started, the complainant was 21 years of age. Taking these factors together, the Court observed,
“…the complainant has willingly been staying with the appellant and had the relationship. Therefore, now if the relationship is not working out, the same cannot be a ground for lodging an FIR for the offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC.”
[Ansaar Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886]
While holding that the term “school children” will include college and university as well while interpreting government memo exempting passengers tax in respect of Stage Carriage (buses) owned by educational institution and used for the transportation of children to and from such institutions, the Division Bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath, JJ., remarked,
“It gets perforce reiterated that the broad expression “children”, obviously, refers to the students taking instructions in educational institutions, irrespective of their class or standard or level.”
[State of Haryana v. Daronacharya College of Engineering, (2022) 9 SCC 301]
Notable Judgements at High Court
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ* and J.B. Pardiwala, J., rejected all the civil applications in a midnight hearing, filed with regard to granting permission for Rath Yatra on the ground that Supreme Court allowed the Yatra in restricted manner by modifying its earlier order.
[Mahant Akhileshwardasji Ramlakhandasji v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 917]
Also Read | SC modifies order; Jagannath Puri Rath Yatra to take place in a restricted manner
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and J.B. Pardiwala, J.* while addressing certain issues with regard to COVID-19, stated that,
“Healthcare access is the ability to obtain healthcare services such as prevention, diagnosis, treatment and management of diseases, illness, disorders, and other health impacting conditions. For healthcare to be accessible it must be affordable and convenient.”
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 836]
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ* and J.B. Pardiwala, J., held that in view of present times of outbreak of COVID-19, there shall be no Rath Yatra at Ahmedabad and any of the districts in the State of Gujarat.
[Hitesh Kumar Vittalbhai Chavda v. Shri Jagannathji Mandir Trust, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 910]
Compassionate Appointment | “The concept that such daughter-in-law must go back and stay with her parents is abhorrent to our civilized society”: Allahabad HC
The 3- Judge Bench comprising of Ferdino Inacio Rebello, C.J. and Vineet Saran and Vikram Nath, JJ., deliberated upon the question that whether the definition of “family” under the U.P. State Electricity Board Dying in Harness Rules, 1975 would include a daughter-in-law. It was observed that a daughter-in-law on the death of her husband, does not cease to be a part of the family.
“The concept that such daughter-in-law must go back and stay with her parents is abhorrent to our civilized society. Such daughter-in-law must, therefore, have also right to be considered for compassionate appointment as she is part of the family where she is? Married and if staying with her husband’s family. In this context, in our opinion, arbitrariness, as presently existing, can be avoided by including the daughter-in-law in the definition of ‘family’. Otherwise, the definition to that extent, prima facie, would be irrational and arbitrary. The State, therefore, to consider this aspect and take appropriate steps so that a widowed daughter-in-law like a widowed daughter, is also entitled for consideration by way of compassionate appointment, if other criteria is satisfied”.
[U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Urmila Devi, 2011 SCC OnLine All 152]
The Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and Bhargav D. Karia, J., had a dialogue with the Senior most State Law Officers, Advocate General and Government Pleader expressing concern regarding the upsurge of COVID-19 cases in the State and requesting the State to take appropriate measures in order to check and control the rise in COVID-19 cases and its management.
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2021 SCC OnLine Guj 2964]
The Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and Ashutosh J. Shastri, J., dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal which was filed aggrieved by the judgment and order passed in Special Civil Application.
The Court stated that order cannot be said to be perverse in any form, as all possible contentions which had been raised have been dealt with by the Single Judge. The Court further mentioned that after construing the relevant provisions, namely Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009 and after analysing the facts in the context of Section 40(c) of the Act, they were in conformity with the view taken by the Single Judge.
[Godhara Sarvajanik Shikshan Mandal v. Dimpleben Bhrupeshkumar Shah, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1656]
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and J.B. Padiwala, J., allowed a petition which was filed praying to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in order to quash and set aside Rule 1 and Rule 2 of the Bar Council of Gujarat (Enrollment) Rules to the extent that they prohibited the admission of a person who was otherwise qualified to be admitted as an advocate, but was either in full or part-time service or employment or was engaged in any trade, business or profession, as an advocate.
[Twinkle Rahul Mangaonkar v. Union of India, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 3541]
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and P.B. Pardiwala*, J., while addressing an issue with regard to the live streaming of the Court proceedings held that a committee to work out the modalities for the said purpose has been constituted comprising of two Judges of this Court.
“Right to Know and receive information is one of the facts of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and for which reason the public is entitled to witness the Court proceedings.”
[Pruthvirajsinh Zala v. Gujarat High Court, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1055]
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath*, CJ and Ashutosh J. Shastri, J. addressed a suo motu public interest litigation in view of incident of mass congregation in Delhi.
At least 200 members of the said congregation have been repravelled traveled to the State of Gujarat who may be infected with COVID-19. News reports have further confirmed death of one person in Gujarat out of a total of 8 deaths all over the country who had participated in the congregation at Delhi.
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 385]
Re-evaluation of answer sheets with the correct answer key was necessary to maintain the purity of the examination: Allahabad HC
While deciding petitions pertaining to the same examination conducted by the U.P. Higher Education Service Commission for the position of Lecturers in various subjects in degree/post-graduate colleges in the State of U.P., a Division bench comprising of Vikram Nath and Daya Shankar Tripathi, JJ., held that re-evaluation of answer sheets with the correct answer key was necessary to maintain the purity of the examination and directed the Commission to re-evaluate the answer sheets, declare the results accordingly, and conduct interviews for candidates affected by the re-evaluation.
The Court directed the State Government not to issue appointment letters until the re-evaluation and selection process was completed, emphasizing the Commission’s responsibility in conducting the examination.
[Niraj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P., 2017 SCC OnLine All 4547]
Allahabad HC quashes provisions of UGC Guidelines forbidding the practice of creating department-wise cadres
While deciding a matter related to the recruitment of teachers in Banaras Hindu University (BHU), a central educational institution where the petitioners sought cancellation of the then recruitment drive in the University and demanded a fresh beginning, treating each department as a unit for calculating the number of faculty posts reserved for SCs, STs and OBCs, a Division bench comprising of Vikram Nath* and Daya Shankar Tripathi, JJ., quashed Clauses 6(c) and 8(a)(v) of the guidelines framed by the UGC in 2006, and the letter of the UGC dated 19-02-2008, which forbade the practice of creating department-wise cadres.
[Vivekanand Tiwari v. Union of India, 2017 SCC OnLine All 2729]
Note: The Supreme Court in Vijay Prakash Bharati v. Union of India, (2019) 12 SCC 410, affirmed the above-mentioned judgment.
“Basic feature of the Society along with its primary object had been altered by way of amendments to the Rules”: Allahabad HC observes
A Division bench comprising of D.S.R. Varma and Vikram Nath, JJ., observed that in the present case the basic feature of the Society along with its primary object had been altered by way of amendments to the Rules.
The Court accepted that the Assistant Registrar had the jurisdiction not only to deal with the validity of the convening of the meeting but also to examine the import of the resolution regarding the amendments of the Rules. The Court also agreed with the conclusion that the appellant 2 was not a member of the Society but was holding the office of the Secretary by virtue of being the Principal of the Boys’ High School, Allahabad.
The Court held that all other proceedings were also illegal, and the meetings were in violation of the statutory provisions. The Court held that the meetings itself had not been validly convened as per the Rules of the Society and concluded that the orders passed by the Assistant Registrar and the learned Single Judge do not warrant any interference.
[Allahabad High School Society v. State of U.P., 2011 SCC OnLine All 531]
Note: The Supreme Court in Allahabad High School Society v. State of U.P., (2011) 6 SCC 118, affirmed the above-mentioned judgment.
*Judge who has penned the judgment.
1. Barun Chandra Thakur v. Bholu, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 870.
2. Supreme Court gets 9 new judges: All you need to know, The Times of India.
3. Justice Vikram Nath, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
4. Justice Vikram Nath, High Court of Gujarat.
5. Justice Vikram Nath, Supreme Court of India.
6. Justice Vikram Nath, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
7. Supra
8. SC Collegium recommends Appointment of Justice Vikram Nath as Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh HC, SCC Blog.
9. Justice Vikram Nath, High Court of Gujarat
10. Justice Vikram Nath, Supreme Court of India.
11. Supra.
12. Next 8 Chief Justices of India, Supreme Court Observer.
