High Court Logo
Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Smt. Justice Lisa Gill
Hon'ble The Chief Justice

"Learn to live in this world with self-respect". For Original Handwritten Constitution Click Here

HC Background2

Notifications

▾

High Court Calendar

HC Background3

Associated Links

Landmark Judgments

Landmark Judgments

HC Background4

W.P.(C) No. 493/2022

SUBHASH DESAI VS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA

 The Supreme Court held that the Speaker must recognise the whip and leader of the legislature party as appointed by the concerned political party. In the event of a split, the Speaker can decide if MLAs of any faction ought to be disqualified and the Election Commission can decide who can use the party’s symbol. Both these decisions can be taken concurrently and neither the Speaker nor the Election Commission needs to wait for the other’s decision.The Supreme Court held that except in extraordinary cases, neither the High Courts nor the Supreme Court can decide disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. The Court further held that an MLA had the right to participate in legislative proceedings while disqualification petitions are pending against them and the validity of decisions taken by the legislature cannot be questioned merely because disqualification petitions were pending against certain members.The Supreme Court ruled that a Governor is only justified in calling a person to prove their majority on the floor of the legislature if the Governor has reasons to believe, based on objective material, that such a person has lost the confidence of the majority of the legislature.On the issue of whether the Speaker can decide disqualification proceedings when a notice for the Speaker’s removal is pending, the correctness of the decision in Nabam Rebia was referred to a larger Bench of seven judges. Until the issue is decided by seven judges, the Court held that the Speaker has the authority to examine whether a motion for their removal was genuine or merely intended to stop them adjudicating disqualification proceedings. If the Speaker found the removal motion to be genuine, then they could pause the disqualification proceedings till the decision on the Speaker’s removal was concluded. Else, the Speaker could reject the motion. The judgment of the Court was unanimous and authored by Chief Justice Chandrachud.

View Full Judgment
eAPHCR

eAPHCR

HC Background5

December 11 1994

Civil Appeal/816/1992

Hon'ble Justice J.S. VERMA , S.P. BHARUCHA

UCO BANK Vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR HIGH COURT, BOMBAY AND ANR.


December 11 1994

Civil Appeal/816/1992

Honourable Judge J.S. VERMA , S.P. BHARUCHA

UCO BANK Vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR HIGH COURT, BOMBAY AND ANR.


HC Background6

April 11 2023

MACMA/3205/2017

Hon'ble Justice B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

APSRTC Vs. Sirugudi Narayanamma


April 11 2023

MACMA/3205/2017

Honourable Judge B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

APSRTC Vs. Sirugudi Narayanamma


HC Image

Did you know?

Hon'ble Smt. Justice K. Amareswari

Hon'ble Smt. Justice K. Amareswari

The First woman judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Amareswari was born in Appikatla Village in Guntur District. She graduated with a master's degree in Politics and History from Andhra University College of Law in the year 1949. She completed her bachelor's in law from the same university. She became the first lady judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. She was a member of the Bar Council from 1960 to 1961 and was appointed Judge directly from the Bar. She was the Vice-President of the Indian Federation of Women Lawyers.[2] She also worked as the Vice-President of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Advocates Association during the period 1975-1976. In the year 1978 on 29 April she was appointed permanent Judge for Andhra Pradesh High Court. She died on 25 July 2009, in New Delhi where she had been practising as a senior advocate at the Supreme Court. She is survived by a son and daughter.