In Re Section 6a Of The Citizenship Act 1955 vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs Secretary
AI Summary
In a significant Public Interest Litigation concerning the contentious Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, impacting the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, the Supreme Court of India dismissed multiple applications seeking an early hearing. This procedural order reflects the Court's stance on scheduling amidst a complex and high-stakes legal battle, leaving the timeline for substantive hearing on these crucial matters unchanged at this stage.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
Respondent's Counsel
Advocates on Record
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
Several interlocutory applications were filed within various Writ Petitions (Civil), including W.P.(C) No. 562/2012, W.P.(C) No. 876/2014, and W.P.(C) No. 311/2015, all seeking an early hearing. These applications were listed before the Supreme Court on April 22, 2019, where counsel for various parties were present.
Timeline of Events
Primary case (W.P.(C) No. 274/2009) filed.
Several connected Writ Petitions (e.g., W.P.(C) No. 562/2012, W.P.(C) No. 876/2014, W.P.(C) No. 311/2015) filed.
Interlocutory Applications (I.A. No. 28481/2019, I.A. No. 186177/2018, I.A. No. 186166/2018) filed for early hearing of connected matters.
Matter called for hearing of early hearing applications.
Key Factual Findings
Applications for early hearing have been filed in connected matters.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioners/applicants for early hearing implicitly argued that there was sufficient ground (likely referring to the public importance and long pendency of the main matter, i.e., challenges to Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, and its impact on the Assam NRC) to warrant an expedited hearing of the connected cases.
Respondent's Arguments
The order does not detail arguments from the respondent side. However, the court's decision suggests that either the respondents successfully argued against early hearing, or the court, on its own assessment, found no pressing need to deviate from the established schedule.
Court's Reasoning
The Court, after hearing counsel, concluded that "It is not possible to direct early hearing at this stage." The order provides no further elaborate reasoning for this decision, indicating it was a discretionary refusal based on the Court's assessment of its calendar, complexity, or other unstated factors.
- Judicial Discretion in Scheduling
- Case Management Pragmatism
Specific Directions
- 1.It is not possible to direct early hearing at this stage.
- 2.The applications for early hearing are accordingly dismissed.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
This is a brief procedural order dismissing applications for early hearing without providing substantive legal reasoning or interpretation, hence it has no binding or significant persuasive value on points of law.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 274/2009
ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS Petitioner
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondents
WITH
I.A. No. 28481/2019 in W.P.(C) No. 562/2012 (X) (FOR EARLY HEARING) I.A. No. 186177/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 876/2014 (X) (FOR EARLY HEARING) I.A. No. 186166/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 311/2015 (X) (FOR EARLY HEARING)
Date : 22-04-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
For Petitioner
Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Somiran Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR Ms. Hardeep Kaur, Adv.
Mr. Manish Goswami, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
Mr. Kailash Prashad Pandey, AOR
For Respondents/ Applicants
- Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Adv. Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv. Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv.
- Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
- Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satyendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shailja Nanda Mishra, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Aviral Saxena, Adv. Ms. Rachana Srivastava, AOR Ms. Diksha Rai, Adv. (AOR) Ms. Palak Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Aman Nandrajog, Adv. Mr. Ashish Tiwari, Adv. Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mrs. Swarupama Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR Mr. Krishna Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mirtunjaya Mishra, Adv. Mr. Mohan Pandey, AOR Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv. Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Aditya N. Das, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, Adv. (AOR) Ms. Rashmi Singhania, Adv. (AOR) Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR Mr. Leelesh Krishna, Adv. Mr. Salvador Santosh Rebello, Adv. Mr. Saket Signh, Adv. Ms. Sangeeta Singh, Adv. Mrs. Niranjana Singh, AOR Mr. Siddhesh Kotwal, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. (AOR)
Mr. Debojit Barkakati, Adv. (AOR) Mr. Vivek Sonkar, Adv. Mr. R.R. Rajesh, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. (AOR) Mr. V.K. Sidharthan, AOR Mr. Karri Venkata Reddy, Adv. Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Adv. Mr. Ankit Yadav, Adv. Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv. Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv. Ms. G. Indira, AOR Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Rijuk Sarkar, Adv. Ms. Manreet Kaur, Adv. Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv. Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali, Adv. M/s. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv. (AOR) Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv. Mr. A.K. Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Mansoor Ali, Adv. (AOR) Ms. Rubina Jawed, Adv. Ms. Lubna Ishrat Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Leishangthem Roshmani Kh., Adv. (AOR) Ms. Maibam Babina, Adv. Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Mr. Anil Grover, AAG, Haryana Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, AOR Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, AOR Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR
- Mr. Snehasish Mukherjee, AOR
- Mr. Shadan Farasat, AOR
- Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR
- Ms. Sneha Kalita, AOR
- Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR
- Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR
- Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
- Mr. B. Balaji, AOR
- Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR
- Ms. Liz Mathew, AOR
- Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR
- Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR
- Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, AOR
- Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
- M/s. Corporate Law Group, AOR
- Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
I.A. No. 28481/2019 in W.P.(C) No. 562/2012, I.A. No. 186177/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 876/2014 and I.A. No. 186166/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 311/2015
It is not possible to direct early hearing at this stage.
The applications are accordingly dismissed.
(Deepak Guglani) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master