Patna High Court - Orders
Shri Shravan Kumar vs Gyanendra Kumar Singh on 19 February, 2015
Author: Sharan Singh
Bench: Sharan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.83 of 2015
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18807 of 2014
======================================================
The Bihar Legislative Assembly Patna . .... Appellant
Versus
Gyanendra Kumar Singh & Ors .... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No.128 of 2015
IN
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18807 of 2014
======================================================
Shri Shravan Kumar .... .... Appellant
Versus
Gyanendra Kumar Singh & Ors. .... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In LPA No.83 of 2015)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Y. V. Giri, Senior Advocate
Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate
Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. 1 to 4 : Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, Sr. Advocate
Mr. S. B. K. Manglam, Advocate
For the Resp. No. 5 : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Senior Advocate
Mr. Piyush Lal, Advocate
(In LPA No.128 of 2015)
For the Appellant : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Senior Advocate
Mr. Piyush Lal, Advocate
For the Resp. 1 to 4 : Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, Sr. Advocate
Mr. S. B. K. Manglam, Advocate
For the Resp. No. 5 : Mr. Y. V. Giri, Senior Advocate
Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate
Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI
AND
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI
SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI)
6 19-02-2015These two appeals have been listed at the instance of the respondents on the ground that by way of Public Interest Litigation, around 200 people had Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 2/10 submitted before the Division Bench-I that though the order, dated 01.11.2014, passed by the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, disqualifying the respondents herein from being members of Bihar Legislative Assembly, has been set aside by the order, dated 06.01.2015, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014 (Gyanendra Kumar Singh and others Vs. The Bihar Legislative Assembly, Patna and others), the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, has not been allowing their elected representatives, who have been disqualified by the order, dated 01.11.2014, passed by the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, to appear and participate in the proceedings of the House, though the order aforementioned, as indicated hereinbefore, has been set aside by the judgment and order under appeal. However, points out Mr. Kanth, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the respondents in these appeals, that the Division Bench-I has indicated that since the two appeals, namely, LPA No. 83 of 2015 and LPA No.128 of 2015, stand reserved for judgment before this Bench, no interim order can be passed by Division Bench-I in respect of the subject-matter of the appeals pending reserved for judgment before this Bench.
2. Having perused the order, dated 23.01.2015, Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 3/10 passed in the two appeals, it has been submitted by Mr. Vinod Kumar Kanth, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents in the two appeals, that since the order, dated 06.01.2015, in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, passed by the learned single Judge has not been specifically stayed, no further order needs to be passed, now, by this Bench, though the appeals have been listed before this Bench at the instance of the respondents.
3. Resisting the submissions, which have been made by Mr. Kanth, learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Y. V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant, in LPA No. 83 of 2015, has pointed out that the appellant, in LPA No. 83 of 2015, had filed an application, bearing I. A. No. 357 of 2015, seeking stay of the order, dated 06.01.2015, passed in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, which stands appealed in LPA No. 83 of 2015 and it had been submitted, on behalf of the appellant, on 23.01.2015, that the operation of the order, under appeal, be stayed inasmuch as CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, which covers the same subject-matter as the present one, was lying fixed on 27.01.2015, but by reacting to the submissions so made, Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned Counsel for the respondents, had submitted that the writ petitioners would not press for hearing of the said writ Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 4/10 petition and that adjournment would be sought for by the writ petitioners-respondents until decision is rendered in the present appeals and this Court, therefore, merely observed thus, "In view of the above submission made by Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, we, at this stage, do not pass any interim order. However, if the writ petition is taken up for hearing, the appellants shall remain at liberty to move this Court for appropriate order(s)", and, now, according to Mr. Giri, the respondents, contrary to the undertaking given to this Court, are trying to take advantage of the fact that no specific order of stay was passed by this Court on 23.01.2015 and, in this regard, they have also filed an application seeking drawing of a contempt proceeding against the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, for not permitting the respondents herein to participate in the proceedings of the House.
4. In the backdrop of the above grave and complicated situation, we are constrained to take up the question of granting of stay of the judgment and order under appeals passed, on 06.01.2015, in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014.
5. By I. A. No. 357 of 2015, the appellant-
applicant has sought for stay of the operation of the judgment and order under appeal, passed, on Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 5/10 06.01.2015, in C.W.J.C. No. 18807 of 2014 (Gyanendra Kumar Singh and others Vs. The Bihar Legislative Assembly, Patna and others). When I. A. No. 357 of 2015 was pressed for order, on 23.01.2015, what transpired in the Court is necessary to take note of and the order passed on 23.01.2015 is, therefore, reproduced below:
"Heard learned counsel for the parties concerned.
Though Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior counsel, has submitted that the operation of the order, under appeal, passed, on 06.01.2015, in C.W.J.C. No. 18807 of 2014, by a learned single Judge of this Court, may be stayed inasmuch as C.W.J.C. No. 816 of 2015, which covers the same subject matter as the present one, is fixed on 27.01.2015.
Reacting to the submissions so made, Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, learned counsel for the respondents, has submitted that the writ petition will not be pressed for hearing and that adjournment will be sought for by the writ petitioner-respondent until decision is rendered in the present appeals.
In view of the above submission made by Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, we, at this stage, do not pass any interim order. However, if the writ petition is taken up for hearing, the appellants shall remain at liberty to move this Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 6/10 Court for appropriate order(s).
Hearing is concluded and the order is kept reserved."
6. From the order, dated 23.01.2015, aforementioned, what transpires is that on 23.01.2015, when the hearing of the L.P.A. was concluded and the judgment was to be reserved, Mr. Y. V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the appellant, submitted that the operation of the order, under appeal, may be stayed inasmuch as CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, which covers the same subject matter as the present one, is fixed on 27.01.2015, when the appeal is being reserved for judgment and order, but in view of the undertaking, which Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned Counsel, had given before this Court, this Court did not stay the order, on 23.01.2015; however, in the meanwhile, points out Mr. Giri, the respondents-opposite party have filed an application seeking drawing of a proceeding of contempt of the Court.
7. Coupled with the above, what transpires, during the course of submissions made before us, now, is that unless the operation of judgment and order, under appeal, is stayed until the judgment, in appeals, is pronounced, action, pursuant to the order, under appeal, is being forced to be taken by the respondents-opposite party and it may lead to multiplication of proceedings and may Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 7/10 give rise to further complications, while the judgment and order, in appeals, remains pending for judgment.
8. In order to ensure that no complication arises pending pronouncement of the judgment and order in the appeals, we hereby, in the interest of justice, decide to consider if an order of stay is called for against the judgment and order under appeal. We have, therefore, accordingly heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.
9. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and on perusal of the materials on record, including the judgment and order under appeal, we find a prima facie case presented by the appellants herein inasmuch as we notice that the order, dated 01.11.2014, passed by the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, was put to challenge in the writ petition, bearing CWJC NO. 18807 of 2014, seeking, inter alia, a writ in the nature of certiorari setting aside and quashing the order, dated 01.11.2014, aforementioned without, however, retaining the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, as a party in the writ petition, though the nature of the order, dated 01.11.2014, aforementioned, which was sought to get set aside and quashed by issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari was, in law, an order passed by a Tribunal Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 8/10 inasmuch as a Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, in such matters, stands on the same footing as a Tribunal, and, therefore, without impleading the Tribunal (i.e., the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly), no writ, in the nature of certiorari, could have been sought for and/or could have been issued, but the order, dated 01.11.2014, aforementioned was set aside and quashed without the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, who had passed the order, dated 01.11.2014, was not on record of the writ proceeding.
10. To put it a little differently, while the order, dated 01.11.2014, passed by the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, was set aside by issuance of a writ, in the nature of certiorari, the Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, who stands in the position of a Tribunal, was not on record. This apart, allowing the order, dated 06.01.2015, passed, in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, to continue will, in our considered view, lead to multiplicity of proceedings and also give rise to further complications, which need to be restricted forthwith. The balance of convenience is, therefore, in favour of granting stay as has been sought for by the appellant-applicant and, in the present scenario, refusal to stay of the order under appeal, which has been passed on 06.01.2015, in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, would Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 9/10 cause serious miscarriage of justice and also cause irreparable loss inasmuch as it would result into chaos.
11. In the backdrop of what we have indicated above, it will be highly unjust and wholly unfair on the part of this Court, if it allows or permits, directly or indirectly, advertently or inadvertently, the judgment and order, under appeal, passed on 06.01.2015, in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, to be enforced, implemented and/or taken to its logical conclusion, while keeping the appeal preferred against the judgment and order aforementioned pending for judgment and thereby frustrate I.A. No. 357 of 2015, whereby a prayer for stay of the order under appeal, had been made by the appellant-applicants and the same had been pressed for order on 23.01.2015, but this Court did not pass any order of stay in view of the undertaking, which had been given by Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned Counsel for the respondents-opposite party.
12. Situated thus and taking into account, all what we have pointed out above, we are clearly of the view that stay of the operation of the judgment and order, under appeal, is called for.
13. In order to, therefore, ensure that no complication arises pending pronouncement of the judgment in the appeal, we hereby, in the interest of Patna High Court LPA No.83 of 2015 (6) dt.19-02-2015 10/10 justice, direct that the operation of the judgment and order, under appeal, which was passed in CWJC No. 18807 of 2014, shall remain stayed until the time the judgment is delivered in the appeals.
(I. A. Ansari, J.) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Shashi/-
U √