Lawyer moves SC against 'preference' to cases filed by the 'influential'


New Delhi, Jun 16 (IANS): A lawyer has moved the Supreme Court seeking direction to its Secretary General and registrar/officers "not to give preferences to cases filed by influential lawyers/petitioners" and stop discrimination against ordinary lawyers.

Lawyer Reepak Kansal, in the plea, claimed that there is no mechanism to address complaints against erring officers of the registry who favour some law firms/advocates for reasons best known to them. "There are many petitioners/lawyers have been suffering by unequal treatment by the registry as the cases filed by some law firms/influential lawyers are immediately listed by registry ignoring the cases of ordinary petitioners/ lawyers," said the plea.

The plea is likely to come up for hearing on June 18.

Kansal contended, in the plea, that there is violation of fundamental rights of litigants/ordinary lawyers/members of SCBA as guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution.

"No equal treatment is given to ordinary petitioners/lawyer by the registry of this court.

"There is no procedure followed by the registry i.e. filing application for urgent hearing or letter etc which was necessary for the urgent listing of the cases during national lockdown," the plea argued.

The lawyer contended that is impossible for the litigants to pay more court fee or printing charges as illegally demanded by registry. "There is no system to return the excess court fee/charges taken by registry. The Supreme Court Bar Association has also got various complaints against the malfunctioning of registry therefore, a Circular on May 29 was issued by SCBA in this regard," argued the plea.

The lawyer has urged the apex court to issue a direction to the Secretary General and others to give equal treatment to the cases filed by ordinary lawyers/petitioners. It also sought direction to the officials concerned not to point out unnecessary defects in cases of ordinary advocates/petitioners and refund the excess court fee and other charges.

  

Top Stories

Comment on this article

  • Francis, Dubai

    Tue, Jun 16 2020

    That means the supreme court does not believe and practice ' FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS. Cow Swamy is given urgent hearing and poor people not even get a date. At present only BJP and sanghi get preference dates. When equal treatment in getting dates is difficult how can we expect a fair judgement .

    DisAgree Agree [1] Reply Report Abuse

  • roger, manipal

    Tue, Jun 16 2020

    circus..circus.

    DisAgree Agree [2] Reply Report Abuse

  • Jossey Saldanha, Mumbai

    Tue, Jun 16 2020

    I wonder if they are Honest ...

    DisAgree Agree [4] Reply Report Abuse

  • myna, mysuru

    Tue, Jun 16 2020

    "The lawyer contended that is impossible for the litigants to pay more court fee or printing charges as illegally demanded by registry. "There is no system to return the excess court fee/charges taken by registry. The Supreme Court Bar Association has also got various complaints against the malfunctioning of registry therefore, a Circular on May 29 was issued by SCBA in this regard," argued the plea."
    ""No equal treatment is given to ordinary petitioners/lawyer by the registry of this court."

    If the contents of the case filed is true, then it appears the last resort of the common man for Justice is lost. The scales of justice shouldn't be tilting. The blindfolded Goddess of Justice shouldn't start winking visibly. The independence of the Judiciary will be a distant dream which is very very very sad for the Indian nation. "Caesar's wife should be above suspicion".

    DisAgree Agree [1] Reply Report Abuse


Leave a Comment

Title: Lawyer moves SC against 'preference' to cases filed by the 'influential'



You have 2000 characters left.

Disclaimer:

Please write your correct name and email address. Kindly do not post any personal, abusive, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent, discriminatory or unlawful or similar comments. Daijiworld.com will not be responsible for any defamatory message posted under this article.

Please note that sending false messages to insult, defame, intimidate, mislead or deceive people or to intentionally cause public disorder is punishable under law. It is obligatory on Daijiworld to provide the IP address and other details of senders of such comments, to the authority concerned upon request.

Hence, sending offensive comments using daijiworld will be purely at your own risk, and in no way will Daijiworld.com be held responsible.