NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday entertained 59 public interest litigations (PILs) challenging the constitutional validity of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, which has stirred violent protests in several places, and sought the Centre’s response by January 22 while not staying operation of the controversial legislation.A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices R S Gavai and Surya Kant did not need much persuasion from any of the senior advocates, lined up to represent a host of politicians, NGOs, Muslim organisations and associations from Assam, to issue notice to the Centre.The bench’s decision to defer the issue of staying CAA was made easy by senior advocates Rajeev Dhavan and A M Singhvi, who said an early date for hearing on the petitions would suffice since the government is yet to frame rules and regulations necessary for implementation of the CAA, which promises Indian citizenship to minority Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain and Parsi communities fleeing religious persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.Attorney general K K Venugopal said, “Arguments on the issue of staying provisions of the Citizenship Amendment Act w will probably be as lengthy as the arguments on constitutional validity of the CAA. So, it is better that the court gets the response of the Centre on the petitions.”When the crowd in the CJI’s courtroom was getting thin after the SC posted the petitions for further hearing on January 22, pro-BJP advocate-cum-petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay told the bench that there was an urgent need to give wide publicity to CAA provisions as most protesting against the law were not aware of the legislation’s content.“This will help in bringing peace,” he said and was able to catch the bench’s attention. The CJI told Venugopal that it was a suggestion worth taking note of and asked if the government would require a direction from the court to give CAA provisions wide publicity through various media platforms. The AG assured the court that the government would do so on its own.The petitioners included politicians Jairam Ramesh, Mahua Moitra, Asaduddin Owaisi and Ramesh Chennithala; those from Assam included Assam Pradesh Congress Committee, All Assam Students Union , Asom Gana Parishad, All Assam Lawyers Association, Asom Jatiyatabadi Yuba Chatra Parishad, NE Students Union and All Assam Matak Sanmilan; Muslim organisations Indian Union Muslim League , Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind led by Arshad Madani, Muslim Advocates Association and Kerala Muslim Jamaath; Tripura’s ex-ruler Pradyot Deb Burman and Tripura People’s Front; political parties DMK and Kamal Haasan’s Makkal Needi Maiam; NGOs Rihai Manch, United Against Hate; and human rights activist Harsh Mander and others.Ramesh’s petition said the new law was a “brazen attack on the core of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution” and also violated the 1985 Assam Accord, which had stipulated March 24, 1971, as the cut-off date for grant of citizenship to illegal Bangladeshi migrants in Assam.Most petitions said the CAA created unconstitutional classification on the basis of religion and geography and left out Muslims who faced persecution in the three countries. The new law suffered from manifest arbitrariness as it grouped only three countries along with six religions and expressly excluded specific religions and regions from availing of benefits under the CAA, they said.