New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday expunged “unnecessary” comments made by a Punjab and Haryana High Court judge, which were critical of an apex court ruling, and said such “gratuitous observations” belittled the hierarchical nature of the judicial system.
The apex court also issued an advisory to high court judges to exercise “greater restraint” during proceedings as observations made can cause impalpable harm to the judicial process.
A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud Tuesday had taken suo motu cognisance of the remarks made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court judge in an order passed on 17 July, while hearing a dispute over the promotion of a retired Haryana government employee.
In his exceptional order, Justice Rajbir Sehrawat criticised the Supreme Court for staying contempt proceedings against the Haryana government. In his order, the judge said there was a “tendency on the part of the Supreme Court to presume that it was more ‘supreme’.”
The top court said it was “pained” at the remarks, adding no judge should be personally aggrieved by an order that is issued by a higher court. The “gratuitous observations”, it added, was a matter of “grave concern” and upset the hierarchical nature of the judicial system that was meant to preserve the dignity of all institutions within it. “Parties may be aggrieved by an order. Judges are never aggrieved by an order passed by a higher constitutional forum,” the bench added.
Though the suo-motu cognisance was intended to initiate contempt action against Justice Sehrawat, who is due to retire in October this year, the bench refrained from taking the extreme step. Such a move would subject him to inquiry before the top court, the bench remarked, adding that as a “custodian of the adjudicatory process,” it would desist from doing so.
Further, the bench also took note of a video clip of Justice Sehrawat in circulation where he can be seen boasting about declaring invalid the orders of higher judicial fora, including the top court. In these cases, the HC judge had declined to follow stay orders issued by senior courts. The viral video was related to another matter the judge heard Tuesday and was released later in the evening.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta apprised the CJI-led bench about the video and described Justice Sehrawat’s remarks as scandalous, urging the bench to take strict action against him. In response to the law officer’s plea, the bench merely issued an advisory to high court judges to exercise restraint.
What was the Sehrawat case
The case in which Justice Sehrawat made the critical remarks against the Supreme Court concered retiral benefits, which a retired sub-divisional engineer of Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), Naurty Ram, was seeking from a state authority.
In a judgement delivered in 2021, Justice Sehrawat allowed Ram’s petition with a finding that HUDA had wrongly fixed his retirement benefits as he was entitled to receive the executive engineer’s scale and not that of a sub-divisional engineer.
Ram had pleaded that he held temporary charge of a sub-divisional engineer even before he was officially promoted to the post. He retired soon after he was made permanent in that post in a routine promotion.
The former HUDA employee, therefore, wanted his retirement benefits to account for the years he had been in temporary charge of the sub-divisional engineer’s post, and said he was therefore eligible for a retired executive engineer’s benefits.
But HUDA appealed against Justice Sehrawat’s judgment before a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, arguing that Ram would get benefits according to his official position when he retired.
The division bench of the high court threw out HUDA’s appeal, and the state moved the Supreme Court in April.
Meanwhile, Ram moved a contempt petition before Justice Sehrawat, who issued a notice against HUDA, seeking a reply as to why action should not be initiated against the authority for non-compliance with his orders.
In April, the top court while hearing HUDA’s appeal against the division bench order, also stayed Justice Sehrawat’s contempt notice.
In an outburst against the top court’s intervention on 17 July, Justice Sehrawat sounded a “note of caution”, advising the Supreme Court to be more careful when making decisions and asked it to be aware of potential legal ramifications for its directions.
Justice Sehrawat had observed: “Seen at a psychological plane, this type of order is actuated, primarily, by two factors, firstly a tendency to avoid owning responsibility of the consequence which such an order, in all likelihood, is bound to produce, under a pretence that an order of stay of contempt proceedings does not adversely affect anybody. Secondly, a tendency to presume the Supreme Court to be more ‘supreme’ than it actually is and to presume a high court to be less ‘high’ than it constitutionally.”
The judge also quoted important articles from the Constitution to underline the significant role each judicial institution plays and remarked that the Supreme Court “may not always consider the drastic and damaging consequences” its stay orders on contempt proceedings can produce.
Justice Sehrawat’s viral boast
Sources in the Supreme Court told ThePrint that the top court was unaware of the order until it learnt about the viral video clip of Justice Sehrawat.
In that clip, which ThePrint has accessed, the judge can be heard terming a division bench’s order as “rubbish” when a senior advocate informed him that in terms of the said order, the proceedings before him could not go ahead. The order had stayed the hearing before Justice Sehrawat’s court.
During the hearing, as shown in the eight-minute-long clip, the judge claimed he had declared similar stay orders of higher courts as invalid. Justice Sherawat was also seen admonishing a senior advocate for requesting the court to adjourn the hearing and telling him that he should be more aware of the law.
Even before the five judges of the top court assembled to hear the matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice had stayed the operation of Justice Sehrawat’s 17 July order on Tuesday morning.
Presided by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, the two-judge bench observed that the contentious order made comments that had lowered the majesty and dignity of the apex court. Therefore, to prevent any further damage to the institution, Justice Nagu’s bench said it was staying the order until the next date of hearing, which is 22 August.
In the hearing that ensued in the Supreme Court later, Attorney General of India R. Venkataramani called Justice Sehrawat’s behaviour unwarranted. Taking note of the high court’s intervention, the five-judge bench chose not to proceed with any extreme action, despite its conclusion that Justice Sehrawat’s criticism undermined the court’s authority.
But to set right “any attempts made to dislocate the sanctity of the institution and judicial hierarchy,” the bench chose to expunge the remarks, saying they were part of public record. “Compliance with Supreme Court direction is not a matter of choice, but a matter of binding legal system, which overlooks the process of judicial adjudication in the country,” the top court observed.
(Edited by Tikli Basu)