Litigants Getting Fair Hearing Is Important, Not Number Of Cases Listed: Kerala High Court Dismisses Lawyer's Appeal Against Sitting Judge

The Kerala High Court today dismissed the writ appeal preferred by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy against the dismissal of his plea challenging limited listing of cases before the bench of Justice Mary Joseph.

A division bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen said listing of cases is a prerogative of the administrative side of the High Court. "The Chief Justice is the authority to decide and if he does not decide, it does not give the appellant a cause of action to approach the Court by filing a writ petition," it observed while dictating the order in open court.

Court further remarked,

"No one can dictate the Court regarding listing of cases. Number of cases listed is not relevant, as it is upon the Court to consider twenty or two hundred cases depending upon the complexity of the cases. Complaints can be filed even when two hundred cases are listed. Number of cases listed does not matter, the important aspect is that the litigants get a fair hearing."

The Court went on to caution the lawyer against filing such cases against a sitting judge with 'malafide intentions'. It was unimpressed by the fact that Shenoy had arrayed Justice Joseph as a party to the proceedings. It observed,

"Judges of the Court cannot be treated as a litigant who can answer all the allegations raised against them. If the appellant has a grievance, then he should have raised a complaint in the proper manner before the Chief Justice rather than rushing to file a writ petitions before the Court."

Shenoy's petition was earlier dismissed by the High Court stating that no direction can be issued that a judge should hear a particular number of cases in a day.

During hearing of his appeal today, the Court pointed that the listing system has changed and all cases are now listed by posting urgent memos online.

However, Shenoy insisted that the issue be decided because it has serious consequences as it renders power to a judge to curtail the number of cases posted before them "and then nothing would prohibit the judges from listing one case before them". He further argued that he doesn't want to put undue pressure on judges but, if listing of cases before judges is curtailed, people would try to get into that limited slot, which he said would lead to corruption.

Case title: Yeshwanth Shenoy v. The Chief Justice, High Court of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 462

Case number: WA 1316/ 2023 IN WP(C) 6912/ 2023

[Disclaimer: Report is based on court dictation. Copy to be revised based on order]