Supreme Court Should Not Direct Any Court To Decide Pending Case In Time Bound Manner, Cannot Be That Those Who Can Afford To Come To Court Get Priority: SC
In a Special Leave Petition seeking early disposal of a Writ Petition of the year 2014, pending before the Allahabad High Court, the Supreme Court has held that unless a situation is genuinely exceptional, it should refrain from directing any Constitutional Court or any other Court to decide pending cases within a specific time frame.
The Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal observed, "Unless the situation is extraordinary, this Court should not direct any Constitutional Court or for that matter, any Court, to decide any pending case in a time-bound manner."
The Court also remarked, "It cannot be that those who afford to come this Court, get priority and others wait in the queue." Refusing to interfere in the case, the Bench clarified in its order that it is for the Petitioner to move the High Court for expeditious hearing of the case.
Advocate Narendra Kumar Mishra along with Advocate-on-Record Mohd. Fuzail Khan appeared for the Petitioner.
In this case, the Petitioners had approached the High Court questioning the selection process and appointment of certain candidates for the post of Livestock Extension Officers under the Uttar Pradesh Animal Husbandry Department Livestock Extension and Poultry Development Service Rules 2002. The High Court had issued notice in the matter in the year 2014.
Pursuant to filing of the case, the Respondents consttituted an SIT to look into anomalies in the selection process. The Petitioner submitted before the Apex Court the matter before the High Court has not been disposed on account of failure of the Respondents to complete the investigation by the SIT commenced in the year 2016 and submit its report before the High Court. "The Respondents have been seeking adjournment for the purpose of complying with the direction of the High Court for the purpose of submitting the investigation report and this is leading to delay in disposing of the matter finally", the Petitioner contended in the SLP.
Refusing to interfere in the matter, the Apex Court ordered, "No case for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed on ground of delay as well as on merits. It is for the petitioner to move the High Court for expeditious hearing of the case."
Cause Title: Mohd Faiyaz Khan v. State Of U.P. & Ors. [Diary No(s). 38375/2023]