Supreme Court's High-handed behavior

"CET is like KBC"... When I saw this headline a few days ago in a newspaper recently I was stumped for quite sometime. I couldn't get what he was trying to convey from that headline- comparing two totally unrelated things. Yeah, who doesn't know that. Only halfway through the article I understood the shocking truth that it was a comment passed by the supreme court."It's just choose the correct answers, with four options. Anybody can pass it by guessing the right answer and get away with it." Oh, really!!! Sounds like someone miserably failed in CET in his 12th. Why should the court degrade itself by passing such unwanted and unrelated comment? Who asked ITS opinion on what it thought about the CET? What knowledge of the entrance procedure does it have? Does it have any idea how the State Board Exams are the worst method of selection of students for entry into any professional college? Leave the credibility part of it aside. Recent behaviour of the supreme court toward any case that comes under its purview has been quite haughty and unprofessional.

Take the case of OBC quota. When it refused to remove the stay on the case it was cited quoting "When you have waited for 56 years, you can wait for one more year". As a supreme court it is not supposed to pass such idiotic comment(couldn't find a better word) . There is a more professional and ethical way of dealing a case, being the highest institution of justice in a nation. "Since not enough evidences have been presented from your side of the argument, for now we come to a conclusion that this case remains in favour of the other party." This is the most formal way and the only way in which the court should have reacted. As one great man once said "Opinions are like ***holes. Everyone has one." Who asked the judge's opinion? Looks like, nowadays, the supreme is trying increase its TRPs by getting more sensational. A stunt that is better left for CNN-IBN or Deccan Chronicle to try out. Even in the Cauvery water issue, when Karnataka Govt. 's lawyer is posing his arguments, the Judge was found remarking, "Stop. I 've personally been in Chennai and have witnessed the acute water shortage and hardships faced by the people. How can you refuse water to them?" His remark maybe right. But it is a remark that must have been made by the Tamil Nadu's lawyer. Not by a supposedly impartial judge. I feel its better the supreme court strictly minds its own business in the future instead of acting like the God Almighty.