Editorial of the Day: Listing Of Cases In Supreme Court

Context: The letters written by lawyers Dushyant Dave and Prashant Bhushan to the Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, and the Supreme Court Registry respectively, raise concerns over the listing of cases in the Supreme Court. These letters have led to a divide within the legal community.

Dushyant Dave’s Letter

• Issue Raised:The reassignment of certain cases, including those related to human rights, from their original benches to different ones. This deviates from established rules and conventions.
• Appeal to the Chief Justice: As the ‘master of the roster’, Dave urges the Chief Justice to address these concerns, asserting that such reassignments should follow the rules and standard procedures.

We’re now on WhatsApp. Click to Join

Prashant Bhushan’s Letter

• Focus on UAPA Cases: Concerns a batch of petitions filed under the UAPA for work and views critical of the state’s response to the Tripura violence of October 2021.
• Reassignment of Cases: These cases, initially listed before a bench headed by Justice Chandrachud, were later brought before Justices Bose and Trivedi and subsequently listed before Justice Trivedi’s Bench.
• Call for Adherence to Procedures: Reassignment deviated from normal listing procedures and should have been referred back to the Chief Justice for appropriate administrative orders.

Supreme Court Rules and Procedures

• Allocation of Cases: The Supreme Court Rules of 2013 do not explicitly detail the powers of the Chief Justice as the master of the roster in constituting benches and allocating cases.
• Handbook Guidelines: The Handbook on Practice and Procedure, however, specifies that the Registry operates under the general and special instructions of the Chief Justice regarding case allocation and reassignment.
• Coram and Listing: Both lawyers refer to specific clauses and procedures outlined in the Supreme Court’s publications, asserting that the recent reassignments breach these norms.

Responses

• Supreme Court’s Stance: The Supreme Court has not officially responded to these letters.
• Reaction from the Bar: The President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Adish C. Aggarwala, expressed surprise over Dave’s open letter, emphasising that the assignment of cases shouldn’t be questioned either judicially or administratively.
• Judicial Precedent: The Supreme Court has previously upheld the Chief Justice’s unique position as the master of the roster, emphasising its importance in maintaining the court’s independence and integrity.

Sharing is caring!