SC asks HCs not to keep review pleas pending for long

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Mar 08 2017 | 6:28 PM IST
The Supreme Court has asked all high courts not to keep the applications seeking review of any order pending for long, as it delays matters in every court.
The apex court's observation came as it was dealing with a matter in which the Kerala High Court had kept a review plea pending for almost four years.
It said the review plea should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and it is the duty of the high court registry to place the matter before the concerned judge so that the application can be dealt with "in quite promptitude".
"An application for review, regard being had to its limited scope, has to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible," a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar said.
"Though we do not intend to fix any time limit, it has to be the duty of the registry of every high court to place the matter before the concerned judge/bench so that the review application can be dealt with in quite promptitude," it said.
The apex court said a "reasonable period" can be spent for disposal of the review, "but definitely not four years".
"We are compelled to say so as the counsel for petitioner has submitted that there is a delay of 1700 days in preferring the special leave petition against the principal order as he was prosecuting the remedy of review before the high court. The situation is not acceptable," it noted.
"We request the high courts not to keep the applications for review pending as that is likely to delay the matter in every court and also embolden the likes of the petitioner to take a stand intelligently depicting the same in the application for condonation of delay," the bench said.
It said an endeavour has to be made by high courts to dispose of review pleas with expediency and it is the duty and obligation of a litigant to file a review and not to keep it defective "as if a defective petition can be allowed to remain on life support, as per his desire".
"There may be absence of diligence on the part of the litigant, but the registry of the high courts is required to be vigilant. Procrastination of litigation in this manner is nothing but a subterfuge taken recourse to in a manner that can epitomise 'cleverness' in its conventional sense," it said.
While dismissing the plea, the bench said that a copy of its order be sent to the registrar general of all the high courts so that it can be placed before the Chief Justice or Acting Chief Justice to do the needful in the matter.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Mar 08 2017 | 6:28 PM IST

Next Story