Supreme Court Remits Matter to High Court for Expeditious Disposal of Writ Petitions. Supreme Court set aside the High Court's orders and directed the matter to be heard along with another pending writ petition, emphasizing the need for timely resolution.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal by Vinod Kumar Srivastava against the judgment and order dated 4th April, 2007, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The appeal arose from Special Appeal No.330 of 2003, which was preferred against an earlier order dated 11th March, 2003, by a Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.53906 of 2002. The Supreme Court noted that another writ petition, Writ Petition No.2829 of 2009, filed by the appellant, was pending before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. In light of the circumstances, the Supreme Court deemed it appropriate to set aside both the High Court's orders and remitted the matter to the Lucknow Bench for consideration alongside the pending writ petition. The Court requested the High Court to expedite the disposal of the writ petitions, mandating a resolution within one year from the communication of the order. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Remand of Cases - Supreme Court remitted the matter to the High Court for expeditious disposal of writ petitions - The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's orders and directed the matter to be heard along with another pending writ petition, emphasizing the need for timely resolution. Held that the High Court should dispose of the writ petitions within one year (Paras Not mentioned).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court's orders should be set aside and the matter remitted for expeditious disposal.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the judgment and order dated 4th April, 2007, and the order dated 11th March, 2003, remitting the matter to the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court for expeditious disposal.

Law Points

  • Judicial review
  • Writ jurisdiction
  • Remand of cases
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2011 LawText (SC) (02) 109

Civil Appeal No. 2002 of 2011

2011-02-22

Dalveer Bhandari, Deepak Verma

Vinod Kumar Srivastava

U.P. Cooperative Processing and Cold Storage Federation Ltd. and Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal against High Court orders

Remedy Sought

Setting aside High Court orders and remitting the matter

Filing Reason

Challenging the orders of the High Court

Previous Decisions

High Court's orders dated 4th April, 2007 and 11th March, 2003

Issues

Whether the High Court's orders should be set aside Whether the matter should be remitted for expeditious disposal

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant sought to set aside the High Court's orders Emphasis on timely resolution of pending writ petitions

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of timely resolution of legal matters and the need for the High Court to expedite the disposal of pending writ petitions.

Judgment Excerpts

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the judgment and order dated 4th April, 2007.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the judgment and order of the High Court dated 4th April, 2007, which was in response to an earlier order dated 11th March, 2003.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay Hears Petition to Quash Criminal Proceedings Based on SEBI Consent Order. The Court Reviews the Effect of Consent Order under Sections 11 and 11B of the SEBI Act on Pending Trial for Offences under Indian Penal Code and Preventio...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Transfer of Marriage Petition from Vasai to Bandra Family Court Due to Hardship Faced by Wife with Infant Child. The court held that the husband's offer to bear travel expenses was no solace given the arduous journey and the ...