The said petition was being heard by a bench headed by the present Chief Justice of India.
The CJI told the petitioner that after the Constitution bench had upheld the collegium system of appointments and quashed the National Judcial Appointments Commission law, there was no need to go into these issues. Subsequently, this bench referred the matter to a larger five-judge Constitution bench. The Supreme Court had appointed a one-member committee under Justice E Padhmanabhan, a retired high court judge, who submitted his report in July 2009 recommending the three-fold hike.
As Bhushan lost his cool in the initial stages of the hearing and levelled allegations against the CJI, Justice Arun Mishra told him that his "conduct was not proper".
Extending the same principle, the bench said Chief Justice of India is the "Master of Rolls" in the top court and any order passed by any bench assigning any matter to itself or directing the composition of benches won't be binding.
Perturbed by yesterday's order, the CJI, without taking names of the concerned judges, said there were hundreds of matters listed in the court daily and if the orders were passed like this, then the court can not function.
"It can not be presumed if he (Bhushan) says that it (FIR) is against any judge of any court".
Making it clear that they were not underestimating the seriousness of the matter, the court in its order said let the appropriate order be passed to tag the petition with the one by Jaiswal, which was referred to a five-judges constitution bench on Thursday by the bench of Justice Chelameswar and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer.
At the heart of the controversy that is roiling the country's top court, and forcing judges and lawyers to take sides, is a case filed by the Prasad Education Trust seeking relief from a government order barring it from admitting students to its medical college in 2017-18 and 2018-19.
In yet another development, seven Congress MLAs today filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court regarding the matter of OI.
Facebook Combats "Revenge Porn" With New Algorithm
According to FOX News , after piloting in Australia, Facebook plans to test the program in the United States, Britain and Canada. World's most popular social media network 'Facebook's is now taking a step ahead in against of Revenge Porn .
Risking charges of contempt of court, Bhushan walked out of the court complaining that he had not been allowed to speak.
On Wednesday, a petition was filed seeking a SIT probe into the matter before Justice Chelameswar and he agreed to hear it.
He said there are serious apprehensions and therefore this matter should be taken up at 12.45 PM today.
The college moved the Supreme Court against the government's order.
"CBI has raided and the case is lodged".
Friday's order came a day after the two-judge bench headed by Justice Chelameswar, the senior-most judge after the Chief Justice, ordered the setting up of a five-judge constitution bench to hear on Monday a corruption case involving former Orissa High Court judge, I.M. Quddusi. The bench also impleaded the Supreme Court Bar Association in the petition on the forum's request.
Pleading ignorance about the second petition that was filed by Kamini Jaiswal, Bhushan said that since the allegations were in respect of the matter heard by the bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, he should not have exercised his administrative and judicial authority.
Justice Arun Mishra referred to Bhushan's argument that the CJI should recuse from hearing the case and said, "Mr Bhushan, your comment was not appropriate".
CJAR's petition claims that the government could use the investigations to undermine the independence of the judiciary.