Supreme Court dismisses complaint by Andhra CM against Justice Ramana<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nIn 2000, Justice Ramana was appointed as a permanent judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and in 2013, he was its Acting Chief Justice for two months. He was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court in September 2013. He was elevated to the Supreme Court on February 17, 2014. Though Andhra Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy had made allegations against Justice Ramana, the Supreme Court dismissed the said complaint as per in-house procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Justice Ramana has specialized in Constitutional, Criminal, Service and Inter-State River Laws. He is credited with authoring path-breaking judgments in tax, Constitution, arbitration, and criminal law. He was part of a bench that ruled that suspension of the Internet in Jammu and Kashmir should be reviewed immediately. He was also part of the panel of judges, which held that the Chief Justice’s office comes under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are many notable judgments rendered by Justice Ramana. A few are given below: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
2017: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nSwaraj Abhiyan Vs Union of India <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nJustice Ramana wrote a separate concurring opinion, criticizing the poor implementation of the National Food Security Act, 2013. He criticized the States for failing to appoint a District Level Grievance Officer and the State Food Commission, conduct social audits and establish State Vigilance Committees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Excel Crop Care Ltd Vs Competition Commission of India <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nJustices Ramana and A.K. Sikri settled a critical issue in India\u2019s antitrust jurisprudence. They upheld the principle of \u2018relevant turnover\u2019 for determining penalties in competition law contraventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2016<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\nJindal Stainless Steel Vs State of Haryana <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nA nine-judge bench upheld the validity of states\u2019 entry tax on goods entering from other states. Justice Ramana was part of the 7-judge majority which held that it is constitutional for states to impose tax on goods imported from other states to protect local goods from undue discrimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2015:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nAdi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam Vs Government of Tamil Nadu <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Supreme Court bench held that the appointment of Archakas in temples must be in accordance with the Agamas (treatises on temple construction, idol installation and deity worship). They also specified that appointments are subject to constitutional principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shreya Vidyarthi Vs Ashok Vidyarthi<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Supreme Court bench held that women cannot become the Karta of a joint family. However, they can be the managers in particular circumstances as the manager\u2019s role is distinct from that of the Karta.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
With Chief Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde recommending his name to the Central Government, Justice Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana looks set to be the next Chief Justice of India. Justice N.V. Ramana is the second senior-most Judge of the Supreme Court of India. He is also the Executive Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA). Justice […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":110045,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[3],"tags":[134,5365,102720],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2020\/08\/22210759\/PHOTO-2020-08-22-20-24-43-2.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/149488"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=149488"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/149488\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/110045"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=149488"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=149488"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=149488"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}