Nani Ardeshir Palkhivala (16 January 1920 – 11 December 2002) was an Indian jurist and liberal economist. Early years Nani Palkhivala was born in 1920 in Bombay in what was then the Bombay Presidency. His family name derives from the profession of his forefathers (a common practice among Parsis), who had been manufacturers of palanquins ("palkhis"). He was educated at Masters Tutorial High School, and later at St. Xavier's College, both in Bombay. He was reported to have had a stammer. At college, he earned a master's degree in English language and literature. Upon graduating, Palkhivala applied for a position as lecturer at Bombay University, but was not awarded the post. Soon he found himself trying to obtain admission to institutions of higher learning to further his academic career. It being late in the term, most courses were closed, so he enrolled at Government Law College, Bombay. Entry to the bar Nani Palkhivala was called to the bar in 1946 and served in the chambers of the legendary Sir Jamshedji Behramji Kanga in Bombay. He gained a reputation as an eloquent barrister. and was often the center of attention in court, where students of law and younger members of the bar association would go to watch him. Palkhivala's initial focus was commercial and tax law. Together with Sir Jamshedji, he authored what was then and still is considered to be an authoritative reference tool for tax professionals: The Law and Practice of Income Tax. Palkhivala was 30 years old at the time of the first printing. Sir Jamshedji later admitted that the credit for this work belonged exclusively to Palkhivala. Palkhivala's first participation in a case of constitutional significance occurred in 1951, where he served as junior counsel in the case Nusserwanji Balsara vs. State of Bombay [(1951) Bom 210], assisting the esteemed Sir Noshirwan Engineer in challenging several provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act. Before the year was out, Palkhivala was arguing cases himself, but his first case of constitutional importance (a challenge of the validity of land requisition acts) was lost before the Bombay High Court. By 1954, barely 10 years after his admission to the bar, Palkhivala was arguing before the Supreme Court. It was in his first case before this court (concerning the interpretation of Article 29(2) and Article 30 of the Indian Constitution, which regulate the rights of religious minorities) that he articulated his (later)