This may interest lawyers who may have something to do with Supreme Court.
When a matter comes to Supreme Court, the primary intention of the judges is to ensure fair justice to parties and in doing so the judges are not bound by technicalities of formats of orders.
Over the years I have seen different types of orders of Supreme Court while dismissing a case.
Some of the formats of order which I have happened to notice are as following:
1) Leave to appeal is refused.
2) Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
3) Special Leave Petition dismissed on merits.
4) Special Leave Petition is dismissed on ground of delay
5) Special Leave Petition is dismissed on ground of delay as well as on merits.
6) Special Leave Petition is permitted to be withdrawn. Dismissed as withdrawn.
7) Special Leave Petition is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file review petition in High Court. Dismissed as withdrawn.
8) Petitiner states that he wants file review petition in High Court. Special Leave Petition is dismissed with liberty to file review petition in High Court. It will be open to petitioner to file Special Leave Petition if he is aggrieved by the order that may be passed in review petition. Dismissed as withdrawn.
9) Petitioner states that he wants to withdraw SLP as he wants to make representation. Special Leave Petition is dismissed with liberty to make representation to concerned authorities.
10) Special Leave Petition is dismissed. In peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings in court below is expedited.
So far as the first type of order is concerned, (Leave to Appeal is refused). I saw it during times of the then Chief Justice B.N.Kirpal.
It was argued that when a person files a Special Leave Petition, he is actually seeking Permission to Appeal.
Therefore, it better to say that permission is Refused instead of saying Dismissed. But later this format was given up.
It was argued that when a person files a Special Leave Petition, he is actually seeking Permission to Appeal.
Therefore, it better to say that permission is Refused instead of saying Dismissed. But later this format was given up.
(Probably Registry raised an objection that unless word "Dismissed" is written in order, they cannot consign files to Record Room!)
So far as Dismissing SLP on ground of delay is concerned, I am not very clear about legality of such an order.
SLP is filed under Art. 136. A Constitutional Provision. The Constitution does not provide for limitation for such petitions under Art.136 or Art. 32. No law of Parliament or Rules can restrict these power by making limitation.
Supreme Court Rules were made in 1966 and rule was made, that 60 days for SLP from Delhi High Court and 90 days time limit for SLP from other High Courts.
I am not sure about constitutional validity of such rules, laws.
Haresh Raichura
1035
So far as Dismissing SLP on ground of delay is concerned, I am not very clear about legality of such an order.
SLP is filed under Art. 136. A Constitutional Provision. The Constitution does not provide for limitation for such petitions under Art.136 or Art. 32. No law of Parliament or Rules can restrict these power by making limitation.
Supreme Court Rules were made in 1966 and rule was made, that 60 days for SLP from Delhi High Court and 90 days time limit for SLP from other High Courts.
I am not sure about constitutional validity of such rules, laws.
Haresh Raichura
1035
