Purely on legal basis, this is a silly judgment of the court. Is this the Supreme Court which is saying that "We are not going to interfere with the committee. It is not appointed by the court,"
In that case, the SC cannot interfere anywhere including the caste-quota-reservations committee.
The SC is contradicting its own rulings where it has so many times interfered in many situations which it DID NOT create
RE:RE:Ram
by frankopenion on Oct 24, 2007 11:42 AM Permalink
I agree with your observation that Supreme Court shouldn't have rejected this plea. But, I guess, it would have taken up this matter, if this was raised by any person, other than Mr. Subramaniam !!!. All know, what a crap this Subbu is.!!
RE:Ram
by kk on Oct 24, 2007 12:04 PM Permalink
Agree on Subramaniam Swamys' part that he has allowed himself to be taken for granted and made a mockery of himself.
But on October 6, the SC had said that the "the formation of the committee was not in conformity with the undertakings given by the government in the Supreme Court"
So, even if the Centre violates what it promised, the SC cannot act ???
This is sheer stupidity on the part of the bench which delivered this judgment.
RE:Ram
by Cape Comorin on Oct 24, 2007 12:43 PM Permalink
It all depends on the castes and religions of the judges. If the bench is dominated by brahmins you could see a different judgement supporting myths.
RE:Ram
by VIJAYA BUDDHIRAJU on Oct 24, 2007 06:41 PM Permalink
Mr Capee How about if the bench is dominated by your caste-the whole Delhi secretariat will be your god damned caste. It is a monument you idiot-mythology or not.
