Senior Advocate Alleges SC Registry Adopted Double Standard In Listing The Matters

(Judicial Quest News Network)

A Senior Advocate Reepak Kansal of Supreme Court has alleged that the SC Registry has adopted double standard in listing the matters, the quick listing is not for ordinary citizen of country.

 Earlier this week the Supreme Court’s Registry had listed the petition of the Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Mr. Arnab Goswami provided special route to Mr. Arnab Goswami by ignoring Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Same treatment I procedure/quick listing is not for other journalists/ ordinary citizens of this country. No ordinary lawyer is permitted to approach this Hon’ble Court without having signed vakalatnama of his/ her client. The Registry did not give option to other advocates to file vakalatnama of his/ her client after getting relief from this Hon’ble Court.

In his letter Addressed to Secretary General Supreme Court of India   Mr. Kansal further states that It is my duty to point out the irregularities, inequality and discrimination in the part of Registry of this Hon’ble Court. As I earlier raised my voice against the discrimination I selective listing by the Registry in Writ Petition (C) No. 541/2020 against the Registry which was dismissed on the wrong observation and this Hon’ble Court imposed a symbolic cost of Rs. 100/-. This Hon’ble Court had wrongly observed that Registry has taken 5 days in pointing out the defects in my case bearing D. No. 11236/2020. The true fact is that the Registry has taken 2 months 5 days in pointing out the defects. Thereafter, I filed an application for modification of the order passed in Writ Petition (c) No. 541/ 2020. The Registry opted not to provide link I allow the petitioner in person to appear in said application and violated the right of the petitioner in person to get justice.

While terming it as an expeditious hearing Mr. Kansal submitted that Earlier a Writ Petition was filed by Mr. Arnab Goswami in the 8 PM which was listed next morning. The Registry opted not to point out defects in his matter and gave special treatment. This treatment is given to him due to his influential Lawyer.

The Registry had adopted the pick and choose  policy to list the matters despite 13 defects in Arnab’s petition  SC Registry accepted it and listed very next day.

 1. The main defect in D. NO. 24646/ 2020 as pointed out by Registry that it was not having signed vakalatnama and custody certificate. The Registry has listed the defective matter on the same day i.e. 10.11.2020 at 17.11.55 without these requisite documents. It is evident on record that vakalatnama is filed after hearing (if it is on record). On 11.11.2020, the case was listed and files were in Court No. 3. It shows that vakalatnama was taken on record either in virtual court 3 or after completion of hearing/ relief.

2. The Registry has also been supporting the professional misconduct by ignoring authorization on behalf of petitioner. The Registry has allowed AOR and Sr. Counsel Mr. Harish Salve to appear in D. No. 24646/2020 without proper authorization I vakalatnama which is professional misconduct in their part.

3. The petitioner was in jail while filing the petition and curing the defects therefore, it is matter of investigation who has signed the vakalatnama in D. NO. 24646/2020.

4. It is also matter of enquiry whether said Vakalatnama was attested by jail authority if not, under which provision exemption was given to petitioner?

5. Why the Registry has given special treatment to the above said D. Nos and listed the defective cases (without vakalatnama)?

6. Why the Registry has allowed the petitioners to cure the defect after hearing of the case?

7. The timing of Supreme Court is 10:30 AM and matter is listed at 10.30 AM on 11.11.2020. It is matter of enquiry at what time defects were cured on 11.11.2020 by the petitioner.

8. It is also important to enquire that the Registry has entered the D. NO. 24646 I 2020 at 10:23 AM before official timing of filing I Registry i.e. 10:30 AM.

9. These matters are filed in the category of 1429 – criminal matters for/ against quashing of criminal proceeding and same is not sent for verifications as per procedure.

10. There are several complete/ verified matters falling in the same category I urgent categories, which are filed prior to above-said D. Numbers, are still in the row/ pipeline. This is the discrimination with the poor litigants who have approached this Hon’ble Court prior to these influential petitioners and lawyers. The said complete I verified cases are waiting for its’ first listing. The Registry has listed the defective matters before the Court ignoring the row/ sequence I competed /verified matters and gave preference to these Diary Numbers.

11. No oral mentioning is allowed in the Supreme Court due to pandemic of corona and there were no applications I letters for urgent listing of these Diary numbers even though Registry has listed these cases within 8 hours. There is no application praying for exemption from filing custody certificate. On the other hand there are several petitioners and their advocates who have filed applications for urgent listing in several matters which are pending since March and not listed by the Registry.

12. There is procedure of urgent listing i.e. to file an application for urgent listing after registration of the case and same is ignored by Registry in these cases.

13. The Registry has adopted double standard in listing the matters. The quick listing is not for ordinary citizen of country. The Registry has provided special route to Mr. Arnab Goswami by ignoring Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Same treatment I procedure/quick listing is not for other journalists/ ordinary citizens of this country. No ordinary lawyer is permitted to approach this Hon’ble Court without having signed vakalatnama of his/ her client. The Registry did not give option to other advocates to file vakalatnama of his/ her client after getting relief from this Hon’ble Court.

It is urged to initiate an enquiry for quick listing of D. Nos. 24646/ 2020, 24647/ 2020 and 24648/ 2020 and take an appropriate action against the erring officers. It is also requested to take an appropriate step against Mr. Harish Salve Sr. Adv and Mr, AOR to appear in D. No. 24646/2020 who

didn’t have authorization I vakalatnama at the time of filing, listing and hearing of the case.