Monday, March 8, 2021
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Plea Filed In SC Against Pick And Choose Policy Of Registry And Its Section Officers In Listing Cases

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking direction to the Registry not to discriminate, humiliate the litigants and to give equal treatment to all litigants by avoiding Pick and Choose Policy as adopted by the Registry and its Section Officers.

The petition has been filed by Advocate Reepak Kansal stating that the Section Officers of the Registry give preference to some law firms and influential advocates for reasons best known to them.

The petitioner has highlighted instances where the Registry and its sections Officers immediately cleared and listed non categorized cases in late hours without pointing out defects and following procedure as per notification.

The petitioner has further alleged that the Registry and its Section Officers take several days to check and point out the defects if it is filed by an ordinary petitioner or lawyer, however they list  the cases within few minutes by ignoring the defects and procedure if, it is filed by any influential lawyer or petitioner.

It has been further alleged that the registry has harassed the petitioner by demanding excess fee and charges and pointing out unnecessary and false defects with an intention to delay the cases and has also illegally de-tagged the matter by ignoring the direction of the Supreme Court.

Seeing the disparity and discrimination on the part of Registry, the petitioner made a complaint to Secretary General of the Supreme Court against the illegal activities of Registry, however the Registry did not respond to the Secretary Generals notice.

The petitioner being member of SCBA, also requested to Secretary /executive members of SCBA against the Registry for not listing the said Writ Petition. Seeing partiality in the part of Registry, the SCBA drafted a Resolution against the illegal activities and discrimination in part of Registry which is still pending.

The petitioner has urged the Court “to take action against the erring officer for their involvement in listing, clearing and bench hunting.”

-India Legal Bureau

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

News Update

Kerala HC tells Vigilance Bureau to act on 3 petitions against corruption in co-op bank

The Public Prosecutor, A. Rajesh submitted that according to the provision Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, competent authority's previous approval would be necessary for conducting any preliminary investigation by the VACB.
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.