Latest Judgments

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association and Another v. Union of India

Public interest litigation — Maintainability — Parties — Directed the petitioner to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be debarred from filing and/or canvassing any public interest litigation on account of the irresponsible and scandalous allegations levelled by him in his pleadings — Held the matter as part heard

(Jagdish Singh Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Madan B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.)


 


Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association and Another _______ Petitioner(s)


 


v.


 


Union of India ___________________________________ Respondent


 


Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 13/2015, decided on May 1, 2015


With


W.P.(C) No. 23/2015, W.P.(C) No. 70/2015, W.P.(C) No. 83/2015 (With Office Report), T.P.(C) No. 391/2015, W.P.(C) No. 108/2015, W.P.(C) No. 124/2015 (With Office Report), W.P.(C) No. 14/2015, W.P.(C) No. 18/2015, W.P.(C) No. 24/2015, W.P.(C) No. 209/2015


 


The Order of the court was delivered by


Order


 


1. Mr. R.K. Kapoor, petitioner in person appearing in Writ Petition(C) No. 18/2015 made his submissions from 10.35 a.m. to 11.05 a.m.


 


2. Thereafter, Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, petitioner in person appearing in Writ Petition(C) No. 14/2015 made his submissions till 11.20 a.m.


 


3. Having considered the pleadings contained in Writ Petition(C) No. 14 of 2015, we consider it appropriate to require the petitioner – Manohar Lal Sharma to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be debarred from filing and/or canvassing any Public Interest Litigation on account of the irresponsible and scandalous allegations levelled by him in his pleadings. The petitioner shall respond to the show cause notice in writing within one week.


 


4. Mr. Mathews J. Nedumpara, petitioner in person in Writ Petition(C) No. 124/2015 made his submissions for about ten minutes. Mr. Rajiv Daiya, petitioner in person in Writ Petition(C) No. 209/2015 also made his submissions for about twenty minutes. Then, Dr. Rajiv Dhavan, learned senior counsel, appearing as amicus, commenced his arguments, and was on his legs when the Court rose for the day, leaving the matter as part-heard.


 


5. For further arguments, list the matter again on 05.05.2015 as part-heard.


 


———