Supreme Court registry engaging In unprofessional activities”, Plea In Supreme Court

Office of Profit: SC Directs Election Commission to Disqualify 12 Manipur MLAs

A petition is filed by Judicial Official of Maharashtra alleging unprofessional activities of its registry in terms of unequal treatment to him as well as common man in terms of listings as well as pointing unnecessary defects in the Supreme Court of India.

The alleged unequal treatment by the registry was narrated by Judicial Magistrate Syedullah Khaleelullah Khan stated that he had filed the writ petition on February 2016  in order to reconsider the Judgement titled All India Judges Association Vs. Union of India & Ors (2002) 4 SCC 247 & amend the Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008.

Notice was issued on the petition and tagged with the similar petitions; the review was dismissed on August 5th. Then a Curative Petition was filed by the petitioner through e-filing and nine defects were pointed out by the Registry, which were cured on the same day. The same was not done even after removing defects and constantly reaching out to the Registry regarding the registration of his petition.

It is averred in this context; “On 17.10.2020, Section X has informed the petitioner by an E-mail vide PID: 103773/2020 that he has removed some defects by filing documents on 03.10.2020.”It is also stated to the petitioner that he has given explanation for not removing defect Nos.3 & 4 but the petitioner was informed to remove the following defects,

1. “Certificate of Senior Advocate is required to be filed.”

2. “Certificate by Petitioner in person is also required to be filed”.

3. “Refiled Curative petition and application is unsigned.”

It is averred that the Curative Petition of the petitioner has deliberately not scrutinized by Registry for 22 days, and such act is discriminatory and thus illegal. The 19 petitions of with the defect has been cured were listed by registry.

Plea in SC stated as;
“Petitioner most humbly submits that he has felt that it is his bounden duty to bring the ground reality to the notice of the Honorable Court so that the corrective action and measures are taken to avoid repetition of unequal treatment to the seekers of JUSTICE which results in violation of ARTICLE 14 of the Constitution of India.”

Striking down the requirement of filing Certificate issued by designated Senior Advocate the petitioner stated that this practice has only increased the costs of litigation. He also added, “A study of the fate of the Curative Petitions filed in this Hon’ble Court along with such certificate would show that it has become empty formality and the time has come to have a fresh look and to reconsider the requirement of filing such certificate along with the Curative Petition”.

The plea seeks issuance of appropriate direction for taking action against erring officers for giving unequal treatment and violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution.






Previous articleVizag Gas leak: SC adjourns appeal against NGT order
Next articleSupreme Court said: welfare of child is of paramount importance
“An Investment in Knowledge pays the best interest”. I Ms. Sakshi Patil currently pursuing Bachelors of Law (LLB) from Pune University ,and I believe that Knowledge is a commodity to share and it should be not remain the monopoly of selected few. Studying Law helps me understand how society is govern and how law acts as medicine to heal the society. Keeping positive and open minded approach in every aspect of life is the aim and I hope to learn with every opportunity and can help to those in need and create awareness among people about law and its importance. As quoted by Henry Ward Beecher, ”A Law is valuable not because it is a law ,but because there is right in it.”