Justice T. S. Sivagnanam New Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court
The government officially announced the appointment of Justice T. S. Sivagnanam as the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court. Justice Sivagnanam, who has been the senior-most judge at the court, had been serving as the Acting Chief Justice since March 31, 2023. The Supreme Court Collegium had recommended his appointment as the Chief Justice in February 2023.
Justice T. S. Sivagnanam started his legal practice in September 1986. He was appointed as an additional judge of the Madras High Court on March 31, 2009, and became a permanent judge on March 29, 2011. In October 2021, he was transferred to the Calcutta High Court where he has been serving since then. He is scheduled to retire on September 15, 2025.
The Calcutta High Court is one of the oldest and most prestigious High Courts in India. It was established in 1862, under the Indian High Courts Act, and is located in Kolkata, West Bengal. The Calcutta High Court has jurisdiction over the state of West Bengal and the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
The court has a Sanctioned strength of 72 (Permanent - 54, Additional - 18) judges.
May 01, 2023
Delhi High Court Gets Two New Additional Judges
The High Court of Delhi got two new additional judges as Judicial officers Girish Kathpalia and Manoj Jain were sworn-in to the post by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.
President Draupadi Murmu had given her assent to the elevation of these two judicial officers on April 2023.
Earlier in April, the Supreme Court Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and also comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice K. M. Joseph, had recommended appointment of three judicial officers as judges of the Delhi High Court.
Apr 30, 2023
Supreme Court Invites Public Suggestions after Releasing Draft List of Neutral Citations of over ...
A list of over 10,000 judgements from January 1,2 014 to March 31,2023 was released by the Supreme Court. The judgements are proposed with neutral citations to facilitate crowdsourced checking.
The exercise is to check for any missing or incorrect items that can be addressed with the help of legal professionals and publishers.
As per the notice, the inputs on the same should be sent to the Registrar of the top court's Library and Editorial Section within 15 days.
One may compare the list of cases and neutral citations with their own database and accordingly make suggestions regarding any missing or incorrect data, if any, in the list of judgements.
A final list of judgments with neutral citation will be published by the Registry after the suggestions are received and recorded.
Apr 29, 2023
Central Government Appoints Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal as Judge of Chhattisgarh High Court
The Central government gave a green signal to the appointment of judicial officer Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal as a judge of Chhattisgarh High Court.
The Supreme Court Collegium had recommendation the appointment of judicial officer Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal as judged of Chhattisgarh High Court on April 12, 2023.
The Chhattisgarh High Court at present, is functioning at a strength of 14 judges as opposed to a sanctioned strength 22 of with a vacancy of 8.
It was established on 1 November 2000 with the creation of New state of Chhattisgarh upon the reorganisation of the state of Madhya Pradesh. The High Court of Bilaspur is the 19th High Court of India.
Apr 28, 2023
Madras High Court Tells Courts Not to Use Wikipedia as Source for Legal Dispute Resolution
The Madras High Court directed the courts to refrain from using crowd-sourced websites such as Wikipedia in legal dispute resolution.
Setting aside an NIA Court order, which rejected the discharge plea of a man booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Division Bench of Justice M. Sundar and Justice Nirmal Kumar quoted the Supreme Court verdict in the Acer India case and Hewlett Packard case, wherein the Apex Court had cautioned against the courts using sources like Wikipedia in legal dispute resolution.
It said that the Apex Court had put in a caveat and caution against use of such sources (Wikipedia) in legal dispute resolution.