REEPAK KANSAL versus SECRETARY GENERAL, & ORS.

Citation: [2020] 4 S.C.R. 459 · Decided: 06-07-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARUN MISHRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
459
[2020] 4 S.C.R. 459
459
REEPAK KANSAL
v.
SECRETARY GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 541 of 2020)
JULY 06, 2020
[ARUN MISHRA AND S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.]
Constitution of India – Art. 32 – The petitioner, an advocate,
filed a writ petition during the pandemic of Covid-19 against the
various officers of the Registry of the Supreme Court and Union of
India seeking direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondents not to give preference to the cases filed by influential
lawyers/ petitioners, law firms etc. – Direction was also sought to
give equal treatment to the cases filed by ordinary lawyers/
petitioners and not to point out unnecessary defects, refund the
excess Court fee and other charges, and not to tag the cases without
order or direction of the Court with other cases – Held: The petition
as filed could not be said to be maintainable – The Petitioner has
impleaded the Secretary General, various Registrars and Officers
of the Registry, SCBA and Union of India – In contrast, writ is filed
against the Supreme Court itself – He ought to have impleaded the
Supreme Court of India in the Writ application through Secretary
General – The omission indicates careless conduct on the part of
the petitioner – The petition was filed in undue haste – The Supreme
Court takes judicial notice of the fact that a large number of
petitions are filed which are defective; still, the insistence is made
to list them and mention is made that they should be listed urgently
– It happens in large number of matters and unnecessary pressure
is put upon the Assistants dealing with the cases – This is too much
to expect perfection from them, particularly when they are working
to their maximum capacity even during the pandemic – The staff is
working despite danger to their life and safety caused due to
pandemic and several of the dealing staff, as well as officers, have
suffered due to Covid-19 – In general, it has become a widespread
practice to blame the Registry for no good reasons – To err is human,
as many petitions are filed with defects and defects are not cured
for years together – In such situation when the pandemic is going
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
460
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 4 S.C.R.
on, baseless and reckless allegations are made against the Registry
of the Supreme Court, which is part and parcel of the judicial system
– There are no ground to entertain the petition – Thus, the petition
is dismissed.
Advocate – Expectations from Advocates and the role of the
Registry – Held: The members of the noble fraternity are expected
to respect themselves first – They are an intellectual class of the
society – what may be proper for others may still be improper for
them, the expectations from them is to be exemplary to the entire
society, then only the dignity of noble profession and judicial can
be protected – The Registry is nothing but an arm of the Supreme
court and an extention of its dignity – Bar is equally respected and
responsible part of the integral system, Registry is part and parcel
of the system and the system has to work in tandem and mutual
reverence.
Dismissing the Writ Petition, the Court
HELD : 1. The petition as filed could not be said to be
maintainable. The petitioner has impleaded the Secretary
General, various Registrars, and officers of the Registry, SCBA,
and Union of India in his writ application. In contrast, Writ is filed
against this Court itself. He ought to have impleaded the Supreme
Court of India in the Writ application through Secretary-General.
The omission indicates careless conduct on the part of
the petitioner. The petition was filed in undue haste. [Para 16]
[466-D]
2. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that a large
number of petitions are filed which are defective; still, the
insistence is made to list them and mention is made that they
should be listed urgently. It happens in a large number of matters,
and unnecessary pressure is put upon the Assistants dealing with
the cases. When petitions with defects are filed, it should not be
expected that they should be listed instantly. To err is human
and there can be an error on the part of the Dealing Assistants
too. This is too much to expect perfection from them, particularly
when they are working to their maximum capacity even during
the pandemic. The cases are being listed. It could not be said
that there was an inordinate delay in listing the matters in view of
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
461
the defect

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.