The Evening Wrap: Supreme Court quashes one-year suspension of 12 Maharashtra BJP MLAs

The Supreme Court on Friday revoked the one-year suspension of 12 Maharashtra BJP legislators, calling it an “irrational” act that would impact the democratic set-up, leave constituencies unrepresented, and help “thin majority” governments manipulate numbers. The MLAs were suspended for a year for “grossly disorderly conduct” in the House. A Bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar quashed the resolution of July 5 last year as “unconstitutional” and traversing beyond the powers of the Assembly. The court said it was illegal to suspend a sitting legislator beyond the ongoing session. The suspension happened during the monsoon session in 2021. “A suspension beyond the remainder period of the ongoing session would not only be grossly irrational measure, but also violative of the basic democratic values owing to unessential deprivation of the member concerned, and more importantly, the constituency would remain unrepresented in the Assembly. It would also impact the democratic set-up as a whole by permitting the thin majority government [coalition government] of the day to manipulate the numbers of the Opposition party in the House in an undemocratic manner,” Justice Khanwilkar observed. The court held that such suspensions would cripple the Opposition’s ability to effectively participate in the discussion/debate in the House owing to the constant fear of its members being suspended for longer period. “There would be no purposeful or meaningful debates but… as per the whims of the majority. That would not be healthy for the democracy as a whole,” it observed. It explained that suspension was essentially a disciplinary measure. Justice Khanwilkar said, “Suspension for a period of one year would assume the character of punitive and punishment worse than expulsion. Suspension for long period and beyond the session has the effect of creating a de facto vacancy though not a de jure vacancy”. Suspension of members or their withdrawal was meant to protect the House from disturbances or obstruction. The power of suspension was different from the privilege to inflict punishment on a member, he stated. The law required the Speaker to adopt a “graded approach”, based on objective and rational standards to ensure that the House functioned smoothly. The Bench had orally agreed during the hearing that prolonged suspension was worse than disqualification from the House. The 12 MLAs had filed petitions challenging the House resolution. They were suspended after the government accused them of “misbehaving” with presiding officer Bhaskar Jadhav in the Speaker’s chamber. The suspended members were Sanjay Kute, Ashish Shelar, Abhimanyu Pawar, Girish Mahajan, Atul Bhatkhalkar, Parag Alavani, Harish Pimpale, Yogesh Sagar, Jay Kumar Rawat, Narayan Kuche, Ram Satpute and Bunty Bhangdia. The court said the resolution passed in July last was not just a case of mere procedural irregularity, but a “unconstitutional, grossly illegal and irrational resolution”. Again, the court said, there was a gross violation of the principles of natural justice by not allowing the suspended MLAs an opportunity to be heard. It declared that the 12 legislators were entitled to all the benefits of members of the Assembly. Supreme Court refuses to lay down yardstick for granting promotion quota to SCs/STs The Supreme Court on Friday refused to lay down the “yardstick” for determining the inadequacy of representation for granting reservation in promotions for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates in government jobs. It held the ‘cadre’ and not class, group or the entire service as the unit for purpose of collection of quantifiable data for giving promotion quotas. The court stuck firm by its Constitution Benches’ decisions in Jarnail Singh and M. Nagaraj cases that the question of adequate representation of SC/ST communities ought to be left to the respective States to determine. “In the light of Jarnail Singh and Nagaraj, we cannot lay down any yardstick for determining the inadequacy of representation,” a Bench led by Justice L. Nageswara Rao noted. In respect of the unit of collection of quantifiable data, the court held that the State was “obligated to collect quantifiable data on the inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.” The court, however, noted that the “collection of information on inadequacy of representation of SC/ST communities cannot be with reference to the entire service or class/group, but should be relatable to the grade/category of posts to which the promotion is sought.” The court held that “cadre” should be the unit for the purpose of collection of quantifiable data in relation to promotional posts. It said otherwise the entire exercise of reservation in promotions would be rendered meaningless if data pertaining to the representation of SCs and STs was done with reference to the entire service”. With the recognition of ‘cadre’ as the unit for collection of quantifiable data, the court set aside its earlier judgment in the B.K. Pavithra case. “As far as B.K. Pavithra case is concerned, we have held that the conclusion of this court approving the collection of data on the basis of groups and not cadres is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh judgments,” Justice Rao pronounced. The court further left it to the State to assess the inadequacy of the representation of SCs and STs for promotional posts by taking into account the relevant factors. A review had to be conducted regarding the data for the purpose of determining the inadequacy of representation in promotions, the court ordered. The court left it to the Union government to fix a “reasonable” time for the States to conduct the review. The court held that the Nagaraj judgment would have “prospective effect.” In 2006, the court, in the order, upheld reservation in promotions. The Nagaraj verdict had laid down three conditions for promotion of SCs and STs in public employment. The court held that the government cannot introduce quota in promotion for its SC/ST employees unless it proves that the particular community was backward, inadequately represented and providing reservation in promotion would not affect the overall efficiency of public administration. The opinion of the government should be based on quantifiable data. Later in 2018, answering a reference on the correctness of the Nagaraj judgment, the Constitution Bench led by then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had upheld the 2006 verdict upholding reservation in promotions and the application of ‘creamy layer’ concept to SC/STs. However Jarnail Singh modified the Nagaraj judgment to the extent that State need not produce quantifiable data to prove the “backwardness” of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community in order to provide quota in promotion in public employment. The five-judge Bench judgment in the Jarnail Singh case in 2018 had given a huge fillip to the government’s efforts to provide “accelerated promotion with consequential seniority” for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) members in government services. The court’s judgment on Friday came in a batch of petitions from across the country seeking further clarity on the modalities for granting reservation in promotion. Ahead of Budget, V. Anantha Nageswaran joins as Chief Economic Advisor The Government has appointed V Anantha Nageswaran as the Chief Economic Advisor, three days before the onset of the Budget session of Parliament. On Friday, Nageswaran assumed charge of the position, which had been vacant since early December 2021 after the previous CEA Krishnamurthy Subramanian returned to academia at the end of his three year-stint. The CEA is usually responsible for drafting the Economic Survey presented a day before the Budget. A part-time member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister between 2019 and 2021, the new CEA holds a Post-Graduate Diploma in Management from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad and a doctoral degree in Finance from the University of Massachusetts for his work on the empirical behaviour of exchange rates. “Prior to this appointment, Dr. Nageswaran has worked as a writer, author, teacher and consultant. He has taught at several business schools and institutes of management in India and in Singapore and has published extensively. He was the Dean of the IFMR Graduate School of Business and a distinguished Visiting Professor of Economics at Krea University,” the Finance Ministry said in a statement. He has also had an extensive career in banking, at the Union Bank of Switzerland (now UBS) and Credit Suisse in Switzerland and in Singapore. He moved to Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd. in Singapore as the Head of Research for Asia in 2006 and was later appointed as its Chief Investment Officer. NeoCov coronavirus found in bats may pose threat to humans in future, scientists caution A type of coronavirus, NeoCov, that spreads among bats in South Africa may pose a threat to humans in future if it mutates further, according to a study by Chinese researchers. The yet-to-be peer-reviewed study recently posted on the preprint repository BioRxiv, shows that NeoCov is closely related to the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), a viral disease first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that can cause diseases ranging from the common cold to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Researchers from Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wuhan University noted that NeoCov is found in a population of bats in South Africa, and to date has been spreading exclusively among these animals. In its current form, NeoCov does not infect humans but further mutations may make it potentially harmful, the researchers noted. “In this study, we unexpectedly found that NeoCoV and its close relative, PDF-2180-CoV, can efficiently use some types of bat Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and, less favourably, human ACE2 for entry,” the authors of the study noted. ACE2 is a receptor protein on cells that provides the entry point for the coronavirus to hook into and infect a wide range of cells. “Our study demonstrates the first case of ACE2 usage in MERS-related viruses, shedding light on a potential bio-safety threat of the human emergence of an ACE2 using ‘MERS-CoV-2’ with both high fatality and transmission rate,” they said. The researchers further noted that infection with NeoCov could not be cross-neutralised by antibodies targeting SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV. “Considering the extensive mutations in the receptor-binding domain ( RBD) regions of the SARS-CoV-2 variants, especially the heavily mutated Omicron variant, these viruses may hold a latent potential to infect humans through further adaptation,” the authors of the study added. A receptor-binding domain is a key part of a virus that allows it to dock to body receptors to gain entry into cells and lead to infection. Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The number of reported coronavirus cases from India stood at 4,06,24,028 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 4,92,385. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 28 JANUARY 2022 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Supreme Court quashes one-year suspension of 12 Maharashtra BJP MLAs The Supreme Court on Friday [revoked the one-year suspension of 12 Maharashtra BJP legislators]( calling it an “irrational” act that would impact the democratic set-up, leave constituencies unrepresented, and help “thin majority” governments manipulate numbers. The MLAs were suspended for a year for “grossly disorderly conduct” in the House. A Bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar quashed the resolution of July 5 last year as “unconstitutional” and traversing beyond the powers of the Assembly. The court said it was illegal to suspend a sitting legislator beyond the ongoing session. The suspension happened during the monsoon session in 2021. “A suspension beyond the remainder period of the ongoing session would not only be grossly irrational measure, but also violative of the basic democratic values owing to unessential deprivation of the member concerned, and more importantly, the constituency would remain unrepresented in the Assembly. It would also impact the democratic set-up as a whole by permitting the thin majority government [coalition government] of the day to manipulate the numbers of the Opposition party in the House in an undemocratic manner,” Justice Khanwilkar observed. [BJP workers protest against Maharashtra Government after suspension of 12 BJP MLAs. File image.]  The court held that such suspensions would cripple the Opposition’s ability to effectively participate in the discussion/debate in the House owing to the constant fear of its members being suspended for longer period. “There would be no purposeful or meaningful debates but… as per the whims of the majority. That would not be healthy for the democracy as a whole,” it observed. It explained that suspension was essentially a disciplinary measure. Justice Khanwilkar said, “Suspension for a period of one year would assume the character of punitive and punishment worse than expulsion. Suspension for long period and beyond the session has the effect of creating a de facto vacancy though not a de jure vacancy”. Suspension of members or their withdrawal was meant to protect the House from disturbances or obstruction. The power of suspension was different from the privilege to inflict punishment on a member, he stated. The law required the Speaker to adopt a “graded approach”, based on objective and rational standards to ensure that the House functioned smoothly. The Bench had orally agreed during the hearing that prolonged suspension was worse than disqualification from the House. The 12 MLAs had filed petitions challenging the House resolution. They were suspended after the government accused them of “misbehaving” with presiding officer Bhaskar Jadhav in the Speaker’s chamber. The suspended members were Sanjay Kute, Ashish Shelar, Abhimanyu Pawar, Girish Mahajan, Atul Bhatkhalkar, Parag Alavani, Harish Pimpale, Yogesh Sagar, Jay Kumar Rawat, Narayan Kuche, Ram Satpute and Bunty Bhangdia. The court said the resolution passed in July last was not just a case of mere procedural irregularity, but a “unconstitutional, grossly illegal and irrational resolution”. Again, the court said, there was a gross violation of the principles of natural justice by not allowing the suspended MLAs an opportunity to be heard. It declared that the 12 legislators were entitled to all the benefits of members of the Assembly. [underlineimg] Supreme Court refuses to lay down yardstick for granting promotion quota to SCs/STs The Supreme Court on Friday [refused to lay down the “yardstick” for determining the inadequacy of representation for granting reservation in promotions for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates]( in government jobs. It held the ‘cadre’ and not class, group or the entire service as the unit for purpose of collection of quantifiable data for giving promotion quotas. The court stuck firm by its Constitution Benches’ decisions in Jarnail Singh and M. Nagaraj cases that the question of adequate representation of SC/ST communities ought to be left to the respective States to determine. “In the light of Jarnail Singh and Nagaraj, we cannot lay down any yardstick for determining the inadequacy of representation,” a Bench led by Justice L. Nageswara Rao noted. In respect of the unit of collection of quantifiable data, the court held that the State was “obligated to collect quantifiable data on the inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.” The court, however, noted that the “collection of information on inadequacy of representation of SC/ST communities cannot be with reference to the entire service or class/group, but should be relatable to the grade/category of posts to which the promotion is sought.” The court held that “cadre” should be the unit for the purpose of collection of quantifiable data in relation to promotional posts. It said otherwise the entire exercise of reservation in promotions would be rendered meaningless if data pertaining to the representation of SCs and STs was done with reference to the entire service”. With the recognition of ‘cadre’ as the unit for collection of quantifiable data, the court set aside its earlier judgment in the B.K. Pavithra case. “As far as B.K. Pavithra case is concerned, we have held that the conclusion of this court approving the collection of data on the basis of groups and not cadres is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh judgments,” Justice Rao pronounced. The court further left it to the State to assess the inadequacy of the representation of SCs and STs for promotional posts by taking into account the relevant factors. A review had to be conducted regarding the data for the purpose of determining the inadequacy of representation in promotions, the court ordered. The court left it to the Union government to fix a “reasonable” time for the States to conduct the review. The court held that the Nagaraj judgment would have “prospective effect.” In 2006, the court, in the order, upheld reservation in promotions. The Nagaraj verdict had laid down three conditions for promotion of SCs and STs in public employment. The court held that the government cannot introduce quota in promotion for its SC/ST employees unless it proves that the particular community was backward, inadequately represented and providing reservation in promotion would not affect the overall efficiency of public administration. The opinion of the government should be based on quantifiable data. Later in 2018, answering a reference on the correctness of the Nagaraj judgment, the Constitution Bench led by then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had upheld the 2006 verdict upholding reservation in promotions and the application of ‘creamy layer’ concept to SC/STs. However Jarnail Singh modified the Nagaraj judgment to the extent that State need not produce quantifiable data to prove the “backwardness” of a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community in order to provide quota in promotion in public employment. The five-judge Bench judgment in the Jarnail Singh case in 2018 had given a huge fillip to the government’s efforts to provide “accelerated promotion with consequential seniority” for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) members in government services. The court’s judgment on Friday came in a batch of petitions from across the country seeking further clarity on the modalities for granting reservation in promotion. [underlineimg] Ahead of Budget, V. Anantha Nageswaran joins as Chief Economic Advisor The Government has [appointed V Anantha Nageswaran as the Chief Economic Advisor]( three days before the onset of the Budget session of Parliament. On Friday, Nageswaran assumed charge of the position, which had been vacant since early December 2021 after the previous CEA Krishnamurthy Subramanian returned to academia at the end of his three year-stint. The CEA is usually responsible for drafting the Economic Survey presented a day before the Budget. A part-time member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister between 2019 and 2021, the new CEA holds a Post-Graduate Diploma in Management from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad and a doctoral degree in Finance from the University of Massachusetts for his work on the empirical behaviour of exchange rates. “Prior to this appointment, Dr. Nageswaran has worked as a writer, author, teacher and consultant. He has taught at several business schools and institutes of management in India and in Singapore and has published extensively. He was the Dean of the IFMR Graduate School of Business and a distinguished Visiting Professor of Economics at Krea University,” the Finance Ministry said in a statement. He has also had an extensive career in banking, at the Union Bank of Switzerland (now UBS) and Credit Suisse in Switzerland and in Singapore. He moved to Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd. in Singapore as the Head of Research for Asia in 2006 and was later appointed as its Chief Investment Officer. [underlineimg] NeoCov coronavirus found in bats may pose threat to humans in future, scientists caution A [type of coronavirus, NeoCov, that spreads among bats in South Africa]( may pose a threat to humans in future if it mutates further, according to a study by Chinese researchers. The yet-to-be peer-reviewed study recently posted on the preprint repository BioRxiv, shows that NeoCov is closely related to the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), a viral disease first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. [An file electron microscope image of the Middle East respiratory syndrome virus. NeoCov, a type of coronavirus found in a population of bats in South Africa, is closely related to the MERS, a viral disease first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Photo: NIAID-RM via AP]  Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that can cause diseases ranging from the common cold to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Researchers from Chinese Academy of Sciences and Wuhan University noted that NeoCov is found in a population of bats in South Africa, and to date has been spreading exclusively among these animals. In its current form, NeoCov does not infect humans but further mutations may make it potentially harmful, the researchers noted. “In this study, we unexpectedly found that NeoCoV and its close relative, PDF-2180-CoV, can efficiently use some types of bat Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and, less favourably, human ACE2 for entry,” the authors of the study noted. ACE2 is a receptor protein on cells that provides the entry point for the coronavirus to hook into and infect a wide range of cells. “Our study demonstrates the first case of ACE2 usage in MERS-related viruses, shedding light on a potential bio-safety threat of the human emergence of an ACE2 using ‘MERS-CoV-2’ with both high fatality and transmission rate,” they said. The researchers further noted that infection with NeoCov could not be cross-neutralised by antibodies targeting SARS-CoV-2 or MERS-CoV. “Considering the extensive mutations in the receptor-binding domain ( RBD) regions of the SARS-CoV-2 variants, especially the heavily mutated Omicron variant, these viruses may hold a latent potential to infect humans through further adaptation,” the authors of the study added. A receptor-binding domain is a key part of a virus that allows it to dock to body receptors to gain entry into cells and lead to infection. [underlineimg] Covid Watch: Numbers and Developments The [number of reported coronavirus cases from India]( stood at 4,06,24,028 at the time of publishing this newsletter, with the death toll at 4,92,385. [underlineimg] Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. Today's Top Picks [[Biopics: Treading the fine line] Biopics: Treading the fine line]( [[Ananya Panday: ‘I like to be kind and stay in my lane’] Ananya Panday: ‘I like to be kind and stay in my lane’]( [[‘Good Luck Sakhi’ movie review: Needed a lot more gravitas] ‘Good Luck Sakhi’ movie review: Needed a lot more gravitas]( [[‘Scream’ movie review: 2022 version is a fun exercise in horror] ‘Scream’ movie review: 2022 version is a fun exercise in horror]( Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](