New Delhi: Following is the chronology of events related to the NJAC Act in the Supreme Court that has been hearing the matter since last year.
Aug 19, 2014: Three PILs filed in SC for declaring the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Bill unconstitutional.
Aug 25: SC refuses to intervene "at this stage" on the issue of NJAC.
Jan 5, 2015: Plea moved by senior advocate Bhim Singh and Supreme Court Advocates On Record Association challenging constitutional validity of NJAC Act, 2014.
Jan 6: SC declines urgent hearing of plea seeking quashing of the NJAC Act.
Feb 13: NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation files a plea in SC challenging constitutional validity of NJAC.
Mar 10: Hearing on validity of NJAC commences in SC with Centre "vigorously" opposing the pleas to stay notifications of the law.
Mar 11: SC restrains all high courts from entertaining any petition challenging validity of NJAC.
Mar 17: SC commences hearing to decide maintainability of a batch of pleas challenging the validity of NJAC.
Mar 18: Centre terms collegium system of judges appointing judges as "illegal" in SC.
Mar 19: SCBA supports in SC NJAC Act meant to replace collegium system.
Mar 24: SC reserves its verdict on maintainability of petitions challenging the validity of NJAC.
Apr 7 : SC refers to a larger bench a batch of petitions challenging constitutional validity of NJAC.
Apr 15: Justice A R Dave recuses from hearing petitions challenging the NJAC Act dealing with judges appointment.
Apr 16: SC constitutes a new bench to examine validity of NJAC.
Apr 22: SC clears the deck for commencing the hearing on the validity of NJAC with a Constitution Bench rejecting demands for recusal of judges.
Apr 23: Centre tells SC that the NJAC will not make fresh appointments of judges to higher judiciary till the issue is settled.
Apr 27: CJI H L Dattu refuses to participate in a three- member panel for selecting two eminent persons in the six- member NJAC.
Apr 28: Various Bar bodies tell SC that validity of NJAC cannot be sustained as it violates "basic structure" of the Constitution.
Apr 29: Ram Jethmalani in SC accuses NDA government of politicising and compromising judicial independence.
Apr 30: Centre tells SC that two eminent persons in the six-member NJAC need not have legal background.
May 5: SC grills Centre over demand for revisiting its 1993 judgement that brought in the collegium system.
May 6: Centre tells SC that the collegium method has failed because it was an "opaque mechanism" which has "stifled democracy".
May 7: Centre clashes with opponents of NJAC over its demand for referring the challenge to a larger bench.
May 8: Opponents of NJAC attacks Centre in SC over its "late" demand for a larger bench to hear the challenge saying "the whole court is held up for no purpose".
May 11: SC makes it clear that it would first decide on the issue of referring the challenge to NJAC to a larger bench of nine or eleven judges.
May 12: SC refuses to accept Centre's preliminary plea that petitions challenging NJAC be referred to a larger bench of nine or eleven judges.
Jun 9: SC tells Centre that appointment of judges in higher judiciary is a "serious" business and cannot be left either to the "hit-and-trial" method.
Jun 15: Centre tells SC that the collegium system cannot be revived even if it quashes the NJAC.
Jul 10: NJAC should not be seen as "good or bad" and rather tested on the proposition that whether it conforms to the basic structure of the Constitution or not, SC tells.
Jul 15: SC reserves verdict on the constitutional validity of NJAC.
Oct 16: SC declares as unconstitutional NJAC Act and 99th constitutional amendment, rejects Centre's plea to refer the petitions to larger bench.