Case Note & Summary
The case involved special leave petitions filed by the State of U.P. against orders of the High Court dated 2.9.1999 and 12.1.2001. The Supreme Court noted that the notice for the special leave petitions was issued on 10.7.2001. However, upon review, it was revealed that the impugned order was actually passed on 12.1.2000, leading to a delay of more than a year in filing the petitions. The Court found that this delay was not explained satisfactorily. Additionally, the Court observed that the impugned order was merely interlocutory and that the writ petition was still pending. The Court emphasized that it typically does not exercise its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution regarding interlocutory orders unless special circumstances exist to prevent manifest injustice or abuse of process. In this case, the Court did not find any such circumstances. Consequently, the interlocutory applications were allowed, and the special leave petitions were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Special Leave Petitions - Delay in Filing - Article 136 of the Constitution - The Court dismissed the special leave petitions due to unexplained delay exceeding one year in filing, as the impugned order was passed on 12.1.2000, not 12.1.2001. The Court held that it would not exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 for interlocutory orders without special circumstances warranting interference (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the special leave petitions should be entertained despite the delay in filing and the nature of the impugned order.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions due to unexplained delay exceeding one year in filing and the interlocutory nature of the impugned order.
Law Points
- Special Leave Petition
- Interlocutory Order
- Delay in Filing
- Article 136 of the Constitution
