Supreme Court lifts the veil on demolition as extra-judicial punishment https://frontline.thehindu.com/columns/supreme-court-demolition-guidelines-right-to-shelter-due-process-officials-liability-justice-gavai-viswanathan-2024/article68874963.ece Nov 16, 2024  In a people-centric judgment, the court demolishes “coincidence theory” as hollow, mandates due process to protect citizens’ right to shelter.

The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government and concerned States, submitted that most of the properties demolished were found to be in breach of local municipal or panchayat laws. He suggested that in some cases it might be by a sheer coincidence that the properties in breach of local municipal laws also happened to belong to accused people. He reiterated that it was the stand of the various States that such properties could be demolished only in accordance with procedures prescribed by law.

 Chief Justice Gavai and the question of judicial propriety https://frontline.thehindu.com/columns/cji-b-r-gavai-roster-controversy-vanashakti-judgment-supreme-court/article69897117.ece  Aug 05, 2025 By excluding the original bench in the Vanashakti matter, the CJI draws attention to the unchecked reach of roster powers.

On May 16 this year, a Supreme Court bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan delivered what might be one of the most  important environmental rulings of the decade. They struck down a 2017 government notification and a 2021 Office Memorandum that had together systemised a backdoor for ex post facto environmental clearances—essentially, allowing projects that started without mandatory environmental approval to legalise their sins later by obtaining clearance post hoc.

 If CJI Gavai chose to exercise his extraordinary powers to direct the Registry to list the two MAs before his bench—and to exclude Justice Bhuyan from the process—then that written administrative order ought to be part of the public record, just like how the Registry’s Office Report is available on the court’s website. The reasons for such a decision should be clearly stated and made publicly accessible.
As far as the Vanashakti judgment is concerned, the court must ensure that it is not nibbled away by requests for “modifications”, “exceptions”, and “clarifications”. 

Mati: Chhattisgarh में पहली बार नक्सलवाद पर बस्तर के लोगों ने बनायी फ़िल्म, सरेंडर नक्सलियों ने… IAN24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chzyKUpJbek