Judicial Discipline Demand To Respect Order Passed By Coordinate Bench: Supreme Court On Comments By Uttarakhand HC On Allahabad HC Order

Judicial discipline/propriety demand to respect the order passed by the Coordinate Bench, the Supreme Court observed while it set aside observations made by Uttarakhand High Court on an order passed by Allahabad High Court.

In this case, a writ petition challenging an award passed by the labour court of Dehradun was filed before Allahabad High Court in the year 1997. Later state of Uttarakhand was formed in the year 2000 with Dehradun as its capital. In view of Section 35 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000, the proceedings pending before the High Court at Allahabad were required to be transferred to the High Court having jurisdiction, in the present case the High Court of Uttarakhand. However, this was not done and writ petition remained pending before the Allahabad High Court.

When the matter came up for hearing (in the year 2014) before the Allahabad High Court, it observed that since the award has been passed by the Labour Court, Dehradun and therefore the jurisdiction does not lie with the High Court of Allahabad. Thus it permitted the petitioners to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file fresh petition before the appropriate court i.e. High Court of Uttarakhand.

Dismissing the writ petition filed before it, the Uttarakhand High Court observed that the power to transfer the case lie with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Allahabad and therefore the Coordinate Bench of Allahabad High Court was not justified in granting liberty to the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file fresh writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court.

In appeal, the Apex Court bench of Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose observed that no error was committed by the High Court of Allahabad permitting the appellants to withdraw the writ petition pending before it with the liberty to file a fresh writ petition before the court having jurisdiction.

"Even otherwise once a judicial order was passed by the High Court of Allahabad permitting the appellants to withdraw the  writ petition with liberty to file a writ petition before the appropriate court (the High Court of Uttarakhand) and thereafter when the appellants preferred the writ petition before the High Court of Uttarakhand, the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Uttarakhand is not at all justified in making comments upon the judicial order passed by the Coordinate Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The Single Judge of the High Court of Uttarakhand was not acting as an appellate court against the judicial order passed by the High Court of Allahabad permitting the appellants to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a writ petition before an appropriate court. Judicial discipline/propriety demand to respect the order passed by the Coordinate Bench and more particularly the judicial order passed by the Coordinate Bench of the High Court, in the present case the Allahabad High Court which as such was not under challenge before it. Therefore the observations made by the High Court of Uttarakhand in the impugned order on the judicial order passed by the learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court permitting the appellants to withdraw the writ petition pending before it with liberty to file fresh writ petition before the appropriate court (the High Court of Uttarakhand) is absolutely unwarranted and is unsustainable.", the court observed.

The court then restored the writ petition and directed the High court to decide and dispose of preferably within a period of six months.

Case: Uttar Pradesh Jal Vidyut (S) Nigam Limited vs. Balbir Singh ; CA 5667 OF 2021

Citation: LL 2021 SC 450

Coram: Justices MR Shah and Aniruddha Bose

Click here to Read/Download Judgment