Faculty Association Of All India Institute Of Medical Sciences v. Union Of India And Others, Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Case Number

(Record of Proceedings),Civil Appeals No. 4500 of 2002 with No. 5119 of 2002, decided on February 12, 2004

Disposition

Attorney(S)

P.P Rao, Senior Advocate (Raj Kr. Gupta, Sheo Kr. Gupta, Bhanu Pratap Gupta and A.N Bardiyar, Advocates) for the Appellant;
Ms Smita Inna, T.A Khan, Rajiv Nanda, Maninder Singh, Angad Mirdha, Ankur Talwar, D.S Mahra, Dr M.P Raju, Dr D.K Jain, Satya Prakash Sharma, Mukul Gupta and Ekram Ali Ansari, Advocates, for the Respondents.

Judges

Justice S.H. Kapadia
Justice S.B. Sinha
Justice V.N. Khare
Dr. Justice A.R. Lakshmanan

Acts

Article 226 of the Constitution

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The appellants filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a regulation that provided reservation for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. Those writ petitions were dismissed. The appellants then filed appeals against the dismissal. Upon hearing the matters in appeal, the court concluded that the cases involve substantial questions of law concerning the interpretation of the Constitution and determined that they should be heard by a Bench of five Judges. The court directed that the papers be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.

Legal Issues Presented

The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court’s analysis is brief. After hearing the appeals, it identified that the matters raise substantial questions of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution. On that basis, the court concluded that the appropriate course is to have the matters heard by a Bench of five Judges. Consequently, it directed that the case papers be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for necessary orders to facilitate such a hearing.

Holding and Implications

REFERRED TO A BENCH OF FIVE JUDGES. The court did not decide the merits of the appeals. Instead, it directed administrative steps by ordering the papers to be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constituting or listing the matters before a five-Judge Bench.

Implications: The immediate consequence is that the appeals will be scheduled for hearing before a larger Bench. There is no determination on the validity of the reservation regulation at this stage, and no broader precedent is set by this order.

Show full summary ...