NE LEGAL BUREAU
NEW DELHI, JULY 5
The Supreme Court would pronounce its verdict on Monday on a plea by a lawyer against the alleged preference given to influential lawyers and petitioners by registry officials in the listing of cases for hearing.
A bench comprising justices Arun Mishra and S A Nazeer, on June 19, had reserved its judgment on the PIL filed by lawyer Reepak Kansal who sought a direction to the apex court registry not to give preference to cases filed by influential advocates or litigants in the listing process when virtual courts are functioning due to prevailing COVID-19 situation.
During the hearing, the top court had expressed unhappiness over the plea and had said that the apex court’s registry has been working “day-and-night” for the benefit of litigants as well as advocates.
“Why are you making such reckless charges against the registry and its section officers,” the bench had asked the lawyer.
“The registry is working day-and-night for you people…this has become a trend,” the bench had said.
The lawyer had said that his plea on the issue of “One Nation One Ration Card” has not been listed by the registry for quite some time.
Earlier, the plea was filed seeking a direction to the apex court’s Secretary-General and other officials to stop “discrimination against not-so-influential lawyers” in the listing of cases before benches for hearings.
The plea said that there was no mechanism to address complaints against erring officers of the registry who, it alleged, favour some law firms and advocates for reasons best known to them.
It also sought a direction to the officials concerned not to point out unnecessary defects in cases of ordinary advocates and petitioners and refund the excess court fee and other charges.
NEW DELHI, JULY 5
The Supreme Court would pronounce its verdict on Monday on a plea by a lawyer against the alleged preference given to influential lawyers and petitioners by registry officials in the listing of cases for hearing.
A bench comprising justices Arun Mishra and S A Nazeer, on June 19, had reserved its judgment on the PIL filed by lawyer Reepak Kansal who sought a direction to the apex court registry not to give preference to cases filed by influential advocates or litigants in the listing process when virtual courts are functioning due to prevailing COVID-19 situation.
During the hearing, the top court had expressed unhappiness over the plea and had said that the apex court’s registry has been working “day-and-night” for the benefit of litigants as well as advocates.
“Why are you making such reckless charges against the registry and its section officers,” the bench had asked the lawyer.
“The registry is working day-and-night for you people…this has become a trend,” the bench had said.
The lawyer had said that his plea on the issue of “One Nation One Ration Card” has not been listed by the registry for quite some time.
Earlier, the plea was filed seeking a direction to the apex court’s Secretary-General and other officials to stop “discrimination against not-so-influential lawyers” in the listing of cases before benches for hearings.
The plea said that there was no mechanism to address complaints against erring officers of the registry who, it alleged, favour some law firms and advocates for reasons best known to them.
It also sought a direction to the officials concerned not to point out unnecessary defects in cases of ordinary advocates and petitioners and refund the excess court fee and other charges.
