- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday, January 10, the central government’s plea to transfer all public interest litigations (PILs) filed at different high courts, across the country challenging the constitutional validity of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019, to the apex court.Appearing for the central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday, January 10, the central government’s plea to transfer all public interest litigations (PILs) filed at different high courts, across the country challenging the constitutional validity of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019, to the apex court.
Appearing for the central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned the matter before a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde stating that various high courts may take conflicting views on the matter, especially in the backdrop of nearly 60 PILs which have been filed in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court observed that it is always good to have advantage to see the view of the high court.
However, at the same time, the Chief Justice of India stated that high courts should not take a view on the matter when it is pending before the Supreme Court.
Mehta stated that that a PIL about the validity of the CAA is scheduled for hearing in Karnataka High Court shortly.