Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
proflie-avatar
Login
exit_to_app
DEEP READ
Munambam Waqf issue decoded
access_time 16 Nov 2024 10:48 PM IST
Ukraine
access_time 16 Aug 2023 11:16 AM IST
Foreign espionage in the UK
access_time 22 Oct 2024 2:08 PM IST
Netanyahu: the world’s Number 1 terrorist
access_time 5 Oct 2024 11:31 AM IST
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightHearing on PIL for...

Hearing on PIL for prompt implementation of Women Reservation Bill adjourned by SC

text_fields
bookmark_border
Hearing on PIL for prompt implementation of Women Reservation Bill adjourned by SC
cancel

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday delayed, to January 22, the hearing on a PIL seeking prompt implementation of the Women Reservation Bill before the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.

Following the absence of a counsel representing the Union government, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta deferred the hearing.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for petitioner Jaya Thakur, said that there is an urgency in the matter and 1/3rd quota may be implemented in 2024 polls if the PIL is allowed by the apex court, IANS reported.

Ordering the matter to be listed on January 22, Justice Khanna said: "I am not going to say anything. Let the other side come."

In November 2023, the top court had refused to issue notice in the matter and remarked that it would be "very difficult" to strike down the provision of the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam Bill 2023 which provides that the 33 per cent quota for women in the legislature will not be implemented unless decennial census and subsequent delimitation exercise is carried out.

The PIL had contended that there was no requirement of the census and delimitation because the number of seats are already declared and the present amendment gives 33 per cent reservation for existing seats.

The plea said that this is an admitted position in our country that 50 per cent is women population but they have only 4 per cent representation in elections.

On January 12, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a similar plea filed by an advocate saying that it did not want multiplicity of litigation in the matter. However, it asked the petitioner, Yogamaya M.G., to instead file an impleadment application in the pending batch of petitions.

Show Full Article
TAGS:Supreme CourtWomen Reservation Bill
Next Story