<p>The Supreme Court may not take up a batch of review petitions for reconsideration of the Sabarimala judgement on January 22. The matter related to re-look on the judgement of September 28 which by a majority view of 4:1 allowed entry of women of all ages into Kerala's Sabarimala temple.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi disclosed that Justice Indu Malhotra, one of the judges of the Constitution bench, would not be available on the date.</p>.<p>The court's response came after advocate Mathews J Nedumpara mentioned an application filed to seek video recording and telecast of the proceedings in the matter.</p>.<p>A bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra had earlier fixed over 48 petitions for review of the judgement for an open court hearing on January 22.</p>.<p>The court had earlier held that the ban imposed on the basis of the physiological condition of women amounted to gender discrimination.</p>.<p>The judgement which saw a huge protest in Kerala was sought to be reviewed on the ground that it was absolutely untenable and irrational.</p>.<p>It was contended that the deity is a 'Naistika Brahmachari', females below the age of 10 and after the age of 50 years are eligible to worship him and there is no practice of excluding worship by females.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court may not take up a batch of review petitions for reconsideration of the Sabarimala judgement on January 22. The matter related to re-look on the judgement of September 28 which by a majority view of 4:1 allowed entry of women of all ages into Kerala's Sabarimala temple.</p>.<p>A bench presided over by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi disclosed that Justice Indu Malhotra, one of the judges of the Constitution bench, would not be available on the date.</p>.<p>The court's response came after advocate Mathews J Nedumpara mentioned an application filed to seek video recording and telecast of the proceedings in the matter.</p>.<p>A bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra had earlier fixed over 48 petitions for review of the judgement for an open court hearing on January 22.</p>.<p>The court had earlier held that the ban imposed on the basis of the physiological condition of women amounted to gender discrimination.</p>.<p>The judgement which saw a huge protest in Kerala was sought to be reviewed on the ground that it was absolutely untenable and irrational.</p>.<p>It was contended that the deity is a 'Naistika Brahmachari', females below the age of 10 and after the age of 50 years are eligible to worship him and there is no practice of excluding worship by females.</p>
