New Delhi: "All Supreme Court judges are very experienced," Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud told a lawyer on Tuesday while admonishing him for complaining about another high court judge.
Advocate Ashok Pandey, who obtained an unfavorable order from a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai, rushed to the CJI courtroom alleging that he was being threatened with cancellation of his law license.
Visibly unimpressed with the allegation, the CJI said: "This court has no appeal within the court. If you feel aggrieved by an order of this court, you have a remedy of review petition. Every judge of this court is very experienced and "He has decades of experience as lawyers as well."
Pandey said that he appeared as a petitioner in person in his PIL and that earlier orders imposed fines on him.
"I only asked that the order imposing the fine be revoked, but instead the judge asked me to leave the courtroom and even threatened to cancel my license," he told the court, which also included judges JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
Exasperated by his protest, Chandrachud told Pandey: "I have been listening to you for a while and now I am starting to lose patience. I can understand what would happen in other courts. Please seek redress as per law."
Pandey protested, once again, and asked the court how the public interest litigation system will work if the court sanctions a PIL petitioner in person for filing petitions.
The CJI tried to convince the lawyer and said that sometimes matters escalate in courts and result in heated exchanges between the judges and the parties, but the high court judges are experienced and know how to deal with such situations. Pandey was reprimanded on the same day by two courts, including a bench headed by Justice Abhay S Oka.
The bench led by Justice Oka criticized Pandey for not depositing the costs of Rs 50,000 imposed on him for filing a "meritless" plea and directed him to submit the amount within two weeks.
The bench, also comprising Justice Augustine George Masih, rejected Pandey's request for more time to deposit the money.
"You are a practicing lawyer and despite having assured the court that you would pay Rs 50,000, you did not pay the money and then went abroad. Now you cannot say that you cannot pay the cost. Pay the cost or we will" . issue a contempt notice against you," the court warned him.
The lawyer said that he has not had any case since 2023 and that his trip abroad was sponsored by his children. The court refused to accept his excuse and ordered him to produce the amount.
On January 2, 2023, the high court dismissed with costs of Rs 50,000 his plea seeking an order not to consider lawyers practicing in the high court for the high court judiciary, terming it "baseless" and a "complete waste of judicial time."
He observed that there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits lawyers practicing in the high court from being appointed judges of the high court.
Pandey had told the court that as per his interpretation of Article 217 of the Constitution, a person who may have been enrolled with a state bar council and subsequently shifted his practice to the high court was not eligible to be appointed as a judge of that court. .
Article 217 of the Constitution deals with the appointment and conditions of office of a high court judge.
Later, another bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan criticized Pandey for not depositing a fine of Rs 1 lakh imposed on him when he challenged the restoration of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's Lok Sabha membership.
Gandhi was disqualified in March 2023 following his conviction in a defamation case. His Lok Sabha membership was restored after the apex court stayed his conviction.
Advocate Ashok Pandey, who obtained an unfavorable order from a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai, rushed to the CJI courtroom alleging that he was being threatened with cancellation of his law license.
Visibly unimpressed with the allegation, the CJI said: "This court has no appeal within the court. If you feel aggrieved by an order of this court, you have a remedy of review petition. Every judge of this court is very experienced and "He has decades of experience as lawyers as well."
Pandey said that he appeared as a petitioner in person in his PIL and that earlier orders imposed fines on him.
"I only asked that the order imposing the fine be revoked, but instead the judge asked me to leave the courtroom and even threatened to cancel my license," he told the court, which also included judges JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
Exasperated by his protest, Chandrachud told Pandey: "I have been listening to you for a while and now I am starting to lose patience. I can understand what would happen in other courts. Please seek redress as per law."
Pandey protested, once again, and asked the court how the public interest litigation system will work if the court sanctions a PIL petitioner in person for filing petitions.
The CJI tried to convince the lawyer and said that sometimes matters escalate in courts and result in heated exchanges between the judges and the parties, but the high court judges are experienced and know how to deal with such situations. Pandey was reprimanded on the same day by two courts, including a bench headed by Justice Abhay S Oka.
The bench led by Justice Oka criticized Pandey for not depositing the costs of Rs 50,000 imposed on him for filing a "meritless" plea and directed him to submit the amount within two weeks.
The bench, also comprising Justice Augustine George Masih, rejected Pandey's request for more time to deposit the money.
"You are a practicing lawyer and despite having assured the court that you would pay Rs 50,000, you did not pay the money and then went abroad. Now you cannot say that you cannot pay the cost. Pay the cost or we will" . issue a contempt notice against you," the court warned him.
The lawyer said that he has not had any case since 2023 and that his trip abroad was sponsored by his children. The court refused to accept his excuse and ordered him to produce the amount.
On January 2, 2023, the high court dismissed with costs of Rs 50,000 his plea seeking an order not to consider lawyers practicing in the high court for the high court judiciary, terming it "baseless" and a "complete waste of judicial time."
He observed that there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits lawyers practicing in the high court from being appointed judges of the high court.
Pandey had told the court that as per his interpretation of Article 217 of the Constitution, a person who may have been enrolled with a state bar council and subsequently shifted his practice to the high court was not eligible to be appointed as a judge of that court. .
Article 217 of the Constitution deals with the appointment and conditions of office of a high court judge.
Later, another bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan criticized Pandey for not depositing a fine of Rs 1 lakh imposed on him when he challenged the restoration of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's Lok Sabha membership.
Gandhi was disqualified in March 2023 following his conviction in a defamation case. His Lok Sabha membership was restored after the apex court stayed his conviction.
