{"id":233146,"date":"2020-07-30T18:58:19","date_gmt":"2020-07-30T13:28:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=233146"},"modified":"2020-07-30T19:24:49","modified_gmt":"2020-07-30T13:54:49","slug":"sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/","title":{"rendered":"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: The bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ has refused to review it’s verdict in B K Pavitra v Union of India<\/span>, (2019) 16 SCC 129<\/a><\/strong> wherein it had upheld the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority to Government Servants Promoted on the Basis of Reservations (to the Posts in the Civil Services of the State) Act 2018<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Review Petition was filed on the ground that did not consider the binding principles laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in M. Nagaraj v Union of India<\/span>, (2006) 8 SCC 212<\/a><\/strong> and Jarnail Singh v Lachhmi Narain Gupta<\/span>, 2018 (10) SCC 396<\/a><\/strong> were not considered by the Court\u00a0 in it’s May 10, 2019 judgment and that, in any case, the matter should have been referred to a Bench of a higher strength. It has also been urged, inter alia, that there is an error apparent in the findings of this Court on the retrospective application of the Reservation Act 2018 and the inapplicability of the \u2018creamy layer\u2019 concept to consequential seniority.<\/p>\n

The Court, however, said that every ground urged<\/span> in the review petitions has been addressed on merits in the judgment under review<\/span><\/em> and that it did not find any error apparent on the record to justify interference<\/p>\n

The Court had, in it’s May 10, 2019 verdict<\/a> held,<\/p>\n

“The object of the Reservation Act 2018 is to accord consequential seniority to promotees against roster points. In this view of the matter, we find no reason to hold that the provisions in regard to retrospectivity in the Ratna Prabha Committee report are either arbitrary or unconstitutional.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

On the issue of creamy layer, the Court had held,<\/p>\n

“The Reservation Act 2018 adopts the principle that consequential seniority is not an additional benefit but a consequence of the promotion which is granted to the SCs and STs. In protecting consequential seniority as an incident of promotion, the Reservation Act 2018 constitutes an exercise of the enabling power conferred by Article 16 (4A).\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The bench had, earlier this year<\/a>, refused to entertain the applications challenging the validity of Karnataka\u2019s 2018 reservation law, which granted reservation in promotion to employees belonging to SC and ST categories. The Court held that applications filed by a group of general category employees for applying \u2018post-based quota\u2019 and the principle of the creamy layer at entry-level in public employment were not maintainable. The maintainability of the MAs was challenged on the ground that though styled as an application for directions, they seek to lay a substantive challenge to the subsequent directions and clarifications issued by the State government in implementing the Reservation Act 2018.<\/p>\n

[BK Pavitra v. Union of India, Review Petition (C) No. 1632 of 2019, order dated 30.07.2020]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ has refused to review it’s verdict in B K Pavitra <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[31884,42851,35338,3645,35337,4841,3793],"class_list":["post-233146","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-creamy-layer","tag-karnataka-reservation-act","tag-merit","tag-promotion","tag-resrervation","tag-review-petition","tag-Seniority"],"yoast_head":"\nSC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ has refused to review it’s verdict in B K Pavitra\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-07-30T13:28:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-07-30T13:54:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/\",\"name\":\"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-30T13:28:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-30T13:54:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018","og_description":"Supreme Court: The bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ has refused to review it’s verdict in B K Pavitra","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-07-30T13:28:19+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-07-30T13:54:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/","name":"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2020-07-30T13:28:19+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-30T13:54:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/30\/sc-dismisses-petition-seeking-review-of-the-2019-verdict-that-upheld-the-constitutionality-of-the-karnataka-reservation-act-2018\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SC dismisses petition seeking review of the 2019 verdict that upheld the constitutionality of the Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":227281,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/03\/19\/sc-upholds-validity-of-karnatakas-2018-reservation-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":0},"title":"Petition challenging implementation of Karnataka Reservation Act 2018 held not maintainable","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 19, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court:\u00a0 The bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud and UU Lalit, JJ has refused to entertain the applications challenging the validity of Karnataka\u2019s 2018 reservation law, which granted reservation in promotion to employees belonging to SC and ST categories. The Court held that applications filed by a group of general\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214561,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/10\/karnataka-reservation-act-2018-constitutional-benefit-of-consequential-seniority-to-be-accorded-restrospectively\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":1},"title":"Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 constitutional; Benefit of consequential seniority to be accorded retrospectively","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"May 10, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Upholding the validity of the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority to Government Servants Promoted on the Basis of Reservation (to the Posts in the Civil Services of the State) Act 2018, the bench of UU Lalit and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ held, \u201cThe Reservation Act 2018 is a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280971,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/04\/supreme-court-justice-abdul-nazeer-retires-throwback-to-a-career-of-four-decades-legal-news-updteas-legal-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":2},"title":"Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Retires- Throwback to a Career of Four Decades","author":"Editor","date":"January 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"After an extensive tenure of 6 years, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer retires today. During this time, Justice Nazeer had been a part of some path-breaking decisions such as- Right to Privacy, Triple Talaq, Ayodhya verdict etc. Justice Nazeer has also been the part of the Constitution Bench which decided upon\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-4.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":292732,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/20\/know-your-judge-supreme-court-justice-a-s-bopanna-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":3},"title":"Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice A.S. Bopanna","author":"Ridhi","date":"May 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice A.S. Bopanna, who started his legal career in the year 1984, is the first person from Coorg district in Karnataka to be elevated to the Supreme Court.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice a. s. bopanna","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-a.-s.-bopanna.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-a.-s.-bopanna.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-a.-s.-bopanna.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-a.-s.-bopanna.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":290049,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/19\/legal-analysis-of-recent-judgments-on-reservation-policies-in-india-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":4},"title":"Reservation Policies in India","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 19, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Reservation as a concept is very wide. Different people understand reservation to mean different things. One view of reservation as a generic concept is that reservation is an anti-poverty measure. There is a different view which says that reservation is merely providing a right of access and that it is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Law made Easy"","block_context":{"text":"Law made Easy","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/law-made-easy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"judgments on reservation policies in india","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/judgments-on-reservation-policies-in-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/judgments-on-reservation-policies-in-india.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/judgments-on-reservation-policies-in-india.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/judgments-on-reservation-policies-in-india.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":259301,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/30\/yearly-round-up-2021-supreme-court-constitution-bench\/","url_meta":{"origin":233146,"position":5},"title":"Yearly Round-up 2021| Supreme Court Constitution Bench","author":"Editor","date":"December 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Unlike the year 2020, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench has functioned limitedly in the year 2021, with the number of judgments delivered by the Constitution Bench being three. As we bid adieu to the year 2021, here is a brief recap of all the developments advanced by the Constitution Bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233146","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=233146"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233146\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=233146"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=233146"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=233146"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}