Datasets:

---

kavyamanohar

/

supreme-court-speech

like 0

good morning brother.

prepare and file a convenience compilation.

why, why.

everyone should.

alright, we will say this.

what we will say.

alright we will say this, that, the hearing of the petitions before the constitution bench

shall commence on the second of august twenty twenty three at ten thirty am, and

shall thereafter proceed from day to day, except for the miscellaneous days, namely, mondays and

fridays. it has been agreed that mister prasanna, learned counsel assisting on the side of

the petitioners and mister kanu agarwal, learned counsel appearing assisting on the side of the

respondents shall be the nodal counsel for the preparation of common convenience compilations.

my lord that is filed.

since convenience compilations have already been prepared earlier, should any of the counsel seek to

add to them, this shall be done positively by the twenty seventh of july twenty

twenty three.

the nodal counsel shall ensure that the convenience compilations are indexed and paginated to facilitate

the hearing.

all the learned counsel shall be given copies of the convenience compilation so indexed and

paginated immediately after the compilations are prepared.

the convenience compilations shall, written submissions shall also be filed on or before the twenty

seventh of july twenty twenty three.

after the twenty seventh of july twenty twenty three, no further additions to the convenience

but parties may like to add to it.

compilation shall be permissible and the arguments shall proceed on the basis of the status

of the record as on the twenty seventh of july twenty twenty three.

the solicitor general has informed the court that the union of india, that though the

union of india has filed an additional affidavit, setting out the perspective of the union

government in regard to the post notification developments, the contents of the affidavit have no

bearing on the constitutional issues which are raised in the petitions and which shall hence

not be relied upon.

for that purpose.

for that purpose.

my lords, small, there is.

the links are available.

even chief justice, the synopsis i think they have been filed by both the parties

already.

just one second, justice kaul is trying to say something.

yes justice kaul?

my lord shall permit me allow to speak.

just one second, justice kaul was saying something, because he is online.

in view of the stage which this matter had reached, chief justice, the synopsis also

had been filed by the parties.

so unless they want to supplement it, both sides had filed, at least especially the

petitioners' side had almost completed argument.

the links are available.

so the synopsis was already filed.

so they may look at whether they want to rely on you know, somewhat altering

the same may not be useful.

justice kaul says if you don't want to supplement from.

we need to supplement.

there have been subsequent judgements which have come in the last two years which we

have to rely on.

that's right.

supplement if required.

that you have already said now.

there is a nodal counsel on this side.

democratic parties.

there are totally.

my lord. any additional material which is permitted to be filed by the date so

prescribed, shall be filed only through the nodal counsel.

the only concern in asking this kind of indulgence is, especially in a matter like

this, the course of an argument, a perspective on how you look at a constitutional

provision or even develop and take earlier or later, how they could be seen in

a particular perspective will be matter for the court and the counsel to assist the

court. therefore to foreclose everything at this stage would be little problematic.

let there be a.

the nodal counsel on their side may have to be.

only document.

mister attorney general, it will become impossible because if people start filing things, i think

this is now dot let us now follow this as a modality for constitution bench

hearings that at least a week before the hearing starts, everybody is aware of what

they are going to argue, and then you conclude it with.

my lords. only one last thing which i wanted to suggest was this, apportionment of

time.

i think that's very important.

i would suggest that on the side of the petitioners you must sit down together,

decide who is going to argue what point.

who is the nodal counsel on your side?

mister ramachandran is leading us.

the order in which arguments would be addressed should be given to us in advance

by the nodal counsel.

likewise, on the side of the respondents. and please apportion time between yourselves.

we might do that before we commence the hearing.

on this side also we'll do.

do that so that you know we can.

we've done it before, we will do that.

we have twenty three petitions my lords on this list, of which fourteen of them

are the challenges.

mister prasanna. mister prasanna, and.

the three hundred and seventy challenges.

eight of them are prior in time, which are challenging article thirty five (a).

those actually can evade the outcome of these fourteen, because if we succeed here then

those have to be heard.

if we fail completely here then those become infructuous.

they are on the list.

i have in fact.

you can hand it over to the court master.

and perhaps what you can do is, this can be added in the convenience compilation

so that instead of taking.