Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/
- We have been seeing you daily on one news or another whacking up institutions, lowers courts and anyone who has taken justice delievry mechanism for a ride. I am compelled to highlight a matter of Armed Forces Tribunal which must reach your attention:
(a) Does it take someone to approach the highest court to understand where would his Jurisdiction lie? (SLP 16963/2023)
(b) Does it take much to understand and give a decision at Apex court on where would the Jurisdiction lie?
(c) The apex court giving a judgement like
keeping the point of Law open for another case when it has been approached for point of law, that implies? (SLP 16963/2023).
(d) Would it be appropriate for a Central Appellate Tribunal to not understand the differences between ” Army Act” and “the Armed Forces Tribunal Act” and give a judgement? (CAT Mumbai Judgement OA 330/2023) (e) The High court itself getting confused between “Repatriation from deputation” vis a vis “Transfer” and equate them as same parallely neglecting the principle of “Nemo Judex in causa” while giving judgement. (Mumbai High Court judgement on WP 9407/2023)
It wouldn’t be difficult to understand from above
statements that somewhere in lower courts the judgement needed more application of mind. The same flaw carried on till the highest level, just because the Respondent in question is the head of the organisation or the Tribunal. The Respondents act may not be equated to few more incidents such as being recommended by a collegium for elevation to Supreme Court but mired under controversy and government chose to make him head of Tribunal. Recently, he was served notice to respond to clarify issuing orders for transfer of another judge which while on argument day at Apex court, it was conveniently replied that,it is a temporary move and definitely all moves are within purview of head of the organisation. Sir, in which circumstances do we see the Apex court using its complete powers under Article 142(1) in removing complete arbitrariness of lower courts.
We have seen whether it is bureaucrats/ Politicians or Senior Military officials getting punished/ cautioned however there is no such case in history of Indian Judiciary. We never have enquiries in judiciary may be because it may affect public faith and interest. No Judge has ever been impeached or being removed on finding that his judgement has been influenced. Still the fear of Apex court must persist (like in recent NCLAT case) else it will be difficult to save the system and as it is collegium system is under scrutiny.
May I request the Honorable Chief Justice to meddle in the affairs of functioning of courts to ensure that there is fear in the lower courts that if it is found out that the judgements are Influenced, strict actions can be taken. Lastly, there shouldn’t be any doubt that it may take a small casual look into the case as to where’s the Jurisdiction lie for matter to be adjudicated and not somewhere in the bins.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.