Justice Nagarathna also emphasized the need for capacity building in investment arbitration to reduce reliance on foreign legal expertise. Justice BV Nagarathna of the Supreme Court on Saturday underscored the need for an interministerial forum to handle high-stakes investment arbitration disputes. She proposed that, instead of individual ministries addressing investment disputes independently, an interministerial forum should be established.This forum, she suggested, would allow ministries to collaborate from the outset, ensuring…
A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court will start hearing the Constitutional issues referred to the larger bench in the Sabarimala review. Apart from CJI Surya Kant, the Bench comprises Justice BV Nagarathna, Justice MM Sundresh, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Prasanna B Varale, Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The seven questions before the Supreme Court are :
(i) What is the scope and ambit of right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (ii) What is the inter-play between the rights of persons under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and rights of religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India? (iii) Whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India are subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India apart from public order, morality and health?
(iv) What is the scope and extent of the word ‘morality’ under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and whether it is meant to include Constitutional morality? (v) What is the scope and extent of judicial review with regard to a religious practice as referred to in Article 25 of the Constitution of India? (vi) What is the meaning of expression “Sections of Hindus” occurring in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India? (vii) Whether a person not belonging to a religious denomination or religious group can question a practice of that religious denomination or religious group by filing a PIL? Follow this page for live updates.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday flagged the non-implementation of the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act, 2021, noting that regulations governing paramedical courses under the statute have not yet been framed even five years after its enactment. A Bench led by Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe observed that the absence of regulations cannot be a ground to stall the enforcement of a Parliamentary statute.
Justice Narasimha remarked, “You can’t stop enforcement of an Act just because regulations aren’t notified.” During the hearing, the Court expressed concern that the delay in framing regulations had effectively paralysed the functioning of State-level laws governing paramedical education after the Central statute came into force. Justice Narasimha pointed out that the Act was enacted in 2021 and yet remained unimplemented in 2026. He directed the counsel appearing for the National Commission to ensure the presence of the responsible official before the Court.
“It is a 2021 Act, we are in 2026. The Act has to be implemented. You ask the officer in charge to be present tomorrow in the court, we want to ask him what is happening. We are not interested in contempt but why is it not implemented,” Justice Narasimha stated. The Court further observed that the delay had created a regulatory vacuum, as State statutes had been frozen following the enactment of the Central law. “On the one hand you have frozen all the State statutes. They are not able to work because Central statute has come. Just because the regulations have not been put in place how can you not implement that?” Justice Narasimha added. In its order, the Court directed that the matter be listed on April 9, 2026, and ordered the officer in charge of the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions to remain present before the Court and inform it about the stage at which implementation of the provisions of the Act is pending. In 2024, the Court had issued a direction to implement the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act. In February this year, a bench led by Justice Vikram Nath issued contempt notice to Centre and States over the failure to comply with the direction. Case : DR. DAYAL INSTITUTE OF PARAMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN | SLP(C) No. 31145/2025