Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Sri Bansidhar Baug vs Orissa High Court Represented Through ... on 28 June, 2021

Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Krishna Murari

                                                             1

     ITEM NO.25+43                       Court 8 (Video Conferencing)                     SECTION XI-A

                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
                                              RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                             No(s).   7129/2021

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10-05-2021
     in WPC No. 17009/2019 passed by the High Court Of Orissa At
     Cuttack)

     SRI BANSIDHAR BAUG                                                             Petitioner(s)

     VERSUS

     ORISSA HIGH COURT REPRESENTED THROUGH
     ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL & ORS.                                                   Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.63084/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
     C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT )

     with

     Diary No. 14137 of 2021

     Date : 28-06-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI

     For Petitioner(s)                     Mr.    Vikash Singh, Sr. Adv.
                                           Mr.    Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.
                                           Mr.    Anirudh Sanganeria, AOR
                                           Mr.    Siddharth Sinha, Adv.
                                           Ms.    Lubna Naaz, Adv.
                                           Ms.    Kunika, Adv.
                                           Ms.    Sakshi Kotiyal, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)

                              UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                    O R D E R

Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner whose primary concern appears to be what is stated in Paragraph 27 of the Signature Not Verified petition.

On consideration of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order but yet we are making it clear that we are not giving our imprimatur to the interpretation of the  2 rules by the High Court as the other parties including the High Court have not assailed the impugned judgment.

The Special Leave Petition is dismissed with the aforesaid observations.

Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

DIARY NO. 14137 of 2021 Permission to file the special leave petition is granted.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is aggrieved to the extent that in Paragraph 29 of the petition, the subsequent notification for designation of senior counsel dated 04-09-2019 has been quashed on the premise that the process under the earlier notification dated 22-04-2019 had not been completed.

It is his submission that the subsequent notification does not deviate from the rules and there is no proscription in issuing the subsequent notification. He, however, does not dispute the position that the process in respect of the first notification should be completed first and thereafter, the applications of the candidates in pursuance to the second notification may be considered.

Issue notice.

In the meantime, the operation of Paragraph 32(ii) is stayed with a caveat that the applications in pursuance to the earlier notification will be considered first for designation and once that process is over, the process in pursuance to the subsequent notification dated 04-09-2019 can be taken up.

[MANISH ISSRANI]                                         [POONAM VAID]
COURT MASTER(SH)                                       COURT MASTER(NSH)