Supreme Court Seeks Report From Collector On Recovery Of Rs 1 Lakh Cost Imposed On Lawyer For Frivolous Petition
Gursimran Kaur Bakshi
17 March 2025 9:05 AM
The Supreme Court today(Monday) sought a report from the Collector as to why the cost imposed on Lucknow-based lawyer for filing a frivolous petition, challenging the restoration of Nationalist Congress Party Leader Mohammed Faizal's Lok Sabha membership, not been recovered as arrears of land revenue.
On October 20, 2023, the petitioner, Advocate Ashok Pandey, had filed a petition contending that once a Member of Parliament (MP) loses their office by due to conviction in a criminal case, they will continue to be disqualified until their acquittal by a higher court.
A bench of Justices B.R Gavai, Aravind Kumar, and Prashant Kumar Mishra had dismissed this public interest litigation (PIL) petition, observing that the petition was nothing but an "abuse of process of law" as none of the fundamental rights of the petitioner are violated, so as to enable him to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
It imposed a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to be deposited to the Advocate Welfare Fund. Out of the said sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs. 50,000/- were to be paid to the Supreme Court Bar Association, which were to be used for Library purpose and Rs.50,000/- be paid to the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association for its Advocate Welfare Fund.
The Court added that if the cost is not paid, the same shall be recovered from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue.
Today, the suo moto miscellaneous application came up before a bench of Justices Gavai and AG Masih on the non-compliance of Court's order. Considering that the cost has not been paid, it passed an order seeking a report from the Collector as to why the recovery of cost has not been made.
It ordered: "We call for a report from the Collector as to why the order passed by this Court and the cost has not been recovered as arrears of land revenue. The report shall be submitted in four weeks."
In another petition filed by the advocate, a bench led by former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud had imposed a cost of five lakhs on Pandey for filing a petition contending that the oath taken by the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court was invalid as he did not use the word 'I'.