3 women judges in Supreme Court, first time in history

Agencies
August 7, 2018

New Delhi, Aug 07: With the swearing-in of Justice Indira Banerjee, the Supreme Court will for the first time in its history have three sitting women judges.

Justice Banerjee is the eighth woman judge in the Supreme Court since Independence.

She became a high court judge on February 5, 2002 and was made a chief justice of the Calcutta High Court on April 5, 2017. She will retire on September 23, 2022.

Before her, senior advocate Indu Malhotra was appointed as the seventh woman judge in the apex court.

Malhotra was the first senior woman advocate to be directly appointed as the judge of the Supreme Court.

Among the three sitting women judges, Justice R Banumathi is the senior most and was elevated to the apex court on August 13, 2014.

The first woman judge of the apex court was Justice Fathima Beevi who was appointed in 1989, 39 years after the Supreme Court was set up in 1950. She was elevated to the apex court after her retirement as a judge of the Kerala High Court.

The second was Justice Sujata V Manohar, who started her career as a judge of the Bombay High Court and rose to become the chief justice of Kerala High Court. She was elevated to the apex court where she remained from November 8, 1994 till August 27, 1999.

Justice Ruma Pal followed Justice Manohar after a gap of almost five months and became the longest-serving woman judge, from January 28, 2000 to June 2, 2006.

After her retirement, it took four years to appoint the next woman judge. Justice Gyan Sudha Misra was elevated to the Supreme Court from the Jharkhand High Court where she was the chief justice. Her tenure in the apex court was from April 30, 2010 to April 27, 2014.

During her stint, she was joined by Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, who served in the apex court between September 13, 2011 and October 29, 2014.

These two judges created a history by holding court together as an all-women bench for a day in 2013.

After the retirement of Justice Desai on October 29, 2014, Justice Banumathi was the lone woman judge in the apex court till the appointment of Justice Malhotra on April 27, this year.

Justice Banumathi will retire on July 19, 2020.

This is the for the first time the apex court is having three women judges. 

 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 10,2020

New Delhi, Jan 10: The Supreme Court while hearing petitions challenging restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir on Friday stated that the right to access the internet is a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

"It is no doubt that freedom of speech is an essential tool in a democratic setup. The freedom of Internet access is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution," a two-judge bench headed by Justice N V Ramana stated while reading out the judgment.

The top court said that Kashmir has seen a lot of violence and that it will try to maintain a balance between human rights and freedoms with the issue of security.

It also directed the Jammu and Kashmir administration to review the restrictive orders imposed in the region within a week. “The citizens should be provided highest security and liberty,” the apex court added.

The top court made observations and issued directions while pronouncing the verdict on a number of petitions challenging the restrictions and internet blockade imposed in Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 in August last year.

The Supreme Court had on November 27 reserved the judgment on a batch of petitions challenging restrictions imposed on communication, media and telephone services in Jammu and Kashmir pursuant to revocation of Article 370.

The court heard the petitions filed by various petitioners including Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad and Kashmir Times editor Anuradha Bhasin.

The petitions were filed after the central government scrapped Article 370 in August and bifurcated Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories -- Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Following this, phone lines and the internet were blocked in the region.

The government had, however, contended that it has progressively eased restrictions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 8,2020

New Delhi, June 8: Only 20.26 lakh migrant workers of the targeted 8 crore such labourers have received free food grains in May and June (2020), according to data released by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution.

In the middle of May, as part of the Rs 20 lakh crore Atma Nirbhar Bharat package, the Modi government had announced that migrant labourers who are not covered under the National Food Security Act (NFSA) or any state-run PDS scheme, will receive free food grains for two months.

"Non-card holders shall be given 5 kg wheat or rice per person and 1 kg chana per family per month for the next 2 months. About 8 crore migrants will benefit from this scheme that will cost the government Rs 3500 crore,” Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had said at a press conference following PM Modi’s announcement.

But the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution said on Sunday, "The states and UTs have lifted 4.42 LMT (lakh metric tonne) of food grains and distributed 10,131 MT of it to 20.26 lakh beneficiaries."

It added, "The Government of India also approved 39,000 MT pulses for 1.96 crore migrant families. Around 28,306 MT gram/dal have been dispatched to the states and UTs. A total 15,413 MT gram have been lifted by various states and UTs". The state governments, the ministry added, had distributed only 631MT (metric tonnes) of gram so far.

Because of the constant movement of migrant workers, the Centre had said that the states will be responsible for identifying the migrants and subsequent food distribution.

The Centre claims it is spending approximately Rs 3,109 crore for food grains and Rs 280 crores for grams/chana under this package.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 18,2020

Ayodhya, Feb 18: A senior Supreme Court lawyer has written to the Ram temple trust on behalf of a group of Muslims in Ayodhya, asking that five acres of land around the demolished Babri Masjid where a graveyard is situated be spared for the sake of 'sanatan dharma'.

The letter, written by advocate M R Shamshad, is addressed to all 10 trustees of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra.

Shamshad said according to Muslims, there is a graveyard known as 'Ganj Shahidan' around the demolished Babri Masjid where 75 Muslims who lost their lives in the 1885 riots in Ayodhya were buried.

"There is a mention of this in Faizabad Gazetteer also," he said.

"The central government has not considered the issue not using the grave-yard of Muslims for constructing the grand temple of Lord Ram. It has violated 'dharma'," the letter stated.

"In view of religious scriptures of 'sanatan dharma', you need to consider whether the temple of Lord Ram can have foundation on the graves of Muslims? This is a decision that the management of the trust has to take," it said.

"With all humility and respect to Lord Ram, I request you, not to use the land of about four to five acres in which the graves of Muslims are there around the demolished mosque," the letter added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.