Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Formulation Of Guidelines For Uniform Implementation Of Laws Declared By Court
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking formation of proper guidelines for uniform implementation of the decisions of the Supreme Court.
A Bench comprising CJI Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli termed the petition as 'thoroughly misconceived'.
"How this could be a subject matter of guidelines?", asked Justice Hima Kohli to the petitioner.
"Article 141 states that law declared by this Court (Supreme Court) is law of the land", added the CJI Justice DY Chandrachud.
The Court, referring to various constitutional provisions, ordered, "Article 141 of the Constitution stipulates that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India. Moreover, Article 142(1) stipulates that the Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such orders as may be necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it and any decree so passed or orders so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India. Hence, the plea for formulating guidelines for the implementation of judicial decisions does not require to be implemented. The petition is dismissed."
The petitioner-Mukul Kumar Sanwariya, an Advocate on the rolls of the Bar Council of Delhi, had stated in his petition that during the course of his profession, he has come across certain occasion when Judicial Officers have applied the ratio of judicial decisions rendered by the Court in discretionary manner in utter disregard to the fact that every decision of the Supreme Court is law of the land under provisions of Article 142 of the Constitution of India and must be implemented uniformly and in true letter and spirit.
It was further stated that the petitioner has been witnessing on numerous occasions that different Courts have been treating and implementing the judgments of the Supreme Court in discretionary manner causing harassment to the litigants on the one hand and multiplicity of litigation on the other.
It was submitted that multiplicity of litigation is the reason for delay in disposal of cases by various Court, which further leads to violation of fundamental right of speedy justice available to the litigants in general.
Cause Title- Mukul Kumar Sanwariya v. Union of India and Ors.