A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra disposed of as many as 14 petitions, seeking its nod to deposit scrapped currency notes on the ground that they could not be deposited during the window period provided by Reserve Bank of India due to compelling reasons.
It asked the petitioners to file interlocutory pleas in the pending petition to be dealt with by the constitution bench.
The top court said it has not opined on the merits of the validity of the ordinance or on the demonetisation decision, which would be dealt with by the larger bench along with the individual grievances.
Attorney General K K Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, said the persons, who have approached the court for depositing scrapped notes, would not be prosecuted with regard to the amount specifically mentioned in their petitions.
"Our hard-earned money has been confiscated without due process of law and without granting fair opportunity," lawyer Pranav Sachdeva, appearing for one of the petitioners, said, adding that the constitution bench should be constituted as expeditiously as possible.
The bench was hearing a batch of petitions, including one filed by one Sudha Mishra seeking a direction to authorities to allow her to deposit demonetised notes as she could not do so during the period specified by the Centre and the RBI.
One of the pleas said the government had assured the people that demonetised currency notes could be exchanged at banks, post offices and RBI branches till December 30, 2016. If people were unable to deposit them by that day, they could do so till March 31, 2017 at RBI branches after complying with certain formalities.
The Prime Minister's address to the nation on the evening of November 8 last year on demonetisation and subsequent notifications of the federal bank that the devalued currency notes can be exchanged at RBI offices even up to March 31, 2017 were valid assurances which stood breached by the Specified Bank Notes Cessation of Liabilities Ordinance, it said.
The apex court had on December 16 last year referred to a Constitution Bench, the issue of validity of government's decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500.
While holding that the challenge to the November 8 notification was in the arena of "public importance" as complaints of inconvenience have been brought, it had said there was a need for a direction for referring it to a larger bench for "authoritative pronouncement by five judges".
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
