LexUNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus PIRTHWI SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 935 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. PIRTHWI SINGH & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 4415-16 of 2018) APRIL 24, 2018 [MADAN B. LOKUR AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.] Judicial Deprecation – Frivolous or infructuous cases filed by Union of India – Engagement of huge number of lawyers for the matter involving the issues already settled by binding precedents – Burdening the Justice Delivery System – Union of India filing matters even after dismissal of similar matters – Moreover, 10 lawyers engaged creating a huge financial liability for an appeal whose fate could be easily imagined on the basis of existing orders of dismissal in similar cases – Union of India’s lack of concern for the Justice Delivery System, deprecated – Appeal dismissed with cost of Rs. 1 lakh. National Litigation Policy, 2010 – Object of, discussed. Union of India v. Balbir Singh Turn 2017 (14) SCALE 189 – referred to. Case Law Reference 2017 (14) SCALE 189 referred to Para 4 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4415- 16 of 2018. From the Judgment and Order dated 12.12.2011 in O. A. No. 2002 of 2011/Order dated 17.04.2013 in M. A. No. 1309-1310 in O. A. No. 2002 of 2011 and Order dated 03.09.2015 in Review Application vide M. A. No. 2475 of 2015 and RA No. 76 of 2015 in O. A. No. 2002 of 2011 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench Chandigarh at Chandimandir. Sandeep Sethi, ASG, Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv., Nikhil Rohatgi, Shashank Khurana, Himanshu Shekar, K. Subba Rao, A. Subba Rao, Ms. Disha Vaish, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advs. for the Appellants. [2018] 3 S.C.R. 935 935 A B C D E F G H 936 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 3 S.C.R. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MADAN B. LOKUR, J. 1. Leave to appeal is granted. 2. Delay condoned. 3. The couldn’t-care-less and insouciant attitude of the Union of India with regard to litigation, particularly in the Supreme Court, has gone a little too far as this case illustrates. 4. The Union of India had filed a batch of appeals which was dismissed by this Court by a judgment and order dated 8th December, 2017. The decision is reported as Union of India v. Balbir Singh Turn.1 5. After dismissal of the batch of appeals, the Union of India filed yet another appeal on the same subject being Civil Appeal No. (blank) of 2018 (Diary No. 4893 of 2018) entitled Union of India & Ors. v. Ex. Nk. Balbir Singh. That appeal came up for consideration before this Court on 9th March, 2018 and was dismissed following the decision in Balbir Singh Turn. While dismissing the appeal, it was noted that it was filed well after several similar matters were dismissed by this Court. The conduct of the Union of India in filing Civil Appeals/Special Leave Petitions after the issue is concluded by this Court was not appreciated. It was noted that the Union of India must take full responsibility for unnecessarily adding to the burden of the justice delivery system. 6. To ensure that the Union of India is far more circumspect, costs of Rs.1,00,000/- were imposed and it was observed that the Union of India must shape up its litigation policy.Unfortunately, the Union of India has learnt no lesson and has continued its non-cooperative attitude. 7. The present appeal was filed on 8th March, 2018 which is also well after the decision in Balbir Singh Turn. We would have expected that with the dismissal of the appeal relating to Balbir Singh Turn and Ex. Nk. Balbir Singh, the Union of India would take steps to withdraw this appeal from the Registry of this Court so that it is not even listed and there is no unnecessary burden on the judges. But obviously, the Union of India has no such concern and did not withdraw its appeal from the Registry itself. 8. The Union of India must appreciate that by pursuing frivolous or infructuous cases, it is adding to the burden of this Court and collaterally 1 2017 (14) SCALE 189 A B C D E F G H 937 harming other litigants by delaying hearing of their cases through the sheer volume of numbers. If the Union of India cares little for the justice delivery system, it should at least display some concern for litigants, many of whom have to spend a small fortune in litigating in the Supreme Court. 9. On 23rd June, 2010 the Union of India released the ‘National Legal Mission to Reduce Average Pendency Time from 15 Years to 3 Years’ and this document is called ‘National Litigation Policy’. The vision/ mission of the National Litigation Policy is as follows: “1. The National Litigation Policy is based
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.