Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Government Counsel Against High Court Observations — Apology Accepted. The Court found the High Court's remarks against the appellant to be unwarranted and accepted the unconditional apology tendered by the appellant.

In Favour of Accused
  • 10
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal by Dr. T.C. Kaushik, an Additional Government Counsel, against observations made by the High Court regarding his conduct in a prior case. The High Court had criticized the appellant for making incorrect statements in a letter dated 11th February 2005, which misrepresented the status of interim relief in a matter. The appellant, present in court, tendered an unconditional apology for the lapse, asserting that there was no intention to distort facts. The Supreme Court reviewed the High Court's order and found the apology to be honest and genuine. It noted that the High Court should have accepted the apology rather than directing departmental action against the appellant. The Court also highlighted that the Government of India had initiated departmental proceedings against the appellant following the High Court's direction. However, the Supreme Court intervened to halt these proceedings, emphasizing the need for the appellant to be more careful in future matters. Ultimately, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's observations and allowed the appeal, concluding that no further action was necessary against the appellant. The decision was made without costs.

Headnote

A) Administrative Law - Conduct of Advocates - High Court's Observations - Supreme Court's Review of High Court's Remarks - The Supreme Court found the High Court's observations against the appellant to be unwarranted and set them aside, accepting the appellant's unconditional apology. The Court emphasized the need for the appellant to exercise greater caution in future dealings with the Union of India (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court's observations against the appellant were justified and what action should be taken regarding the appellant's apology.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's observations and allowed the appeal, stating that no further departmental action was necessary against the appellant. The Court emphasized the need for the appellant to exercise greater caution in future matters.

Law Points

  • Departmental proceedings
  • Apology acceptance
  • High Court observations
  • Advocate conduct
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (SC) (11) 122

Appeal (civil) 4941 of 2006

2006-11-14

Dr.AR.Lakshmanan, Altamas Kabir

Arun Jaitley, R. Mohan, Mohan Parasaran

T.C. Kaushik

Union of India & Ors

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against High Court's observations regarding the conduct of an advocate.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to set aside the High Court's observations and halt departmental proceedings.

Filing Reason

The High Court made adverse remarks against the appellant's conduct in a previous case.

Previous Decisions

The High Court directed departmental action against the appellant based on its observations.

Issues

Justification of High Court's observations Acceptance of the appellant's apology

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the High Court's observations were unwarranted and that his apology should be accepted. The respondents maintained that the observations were justified based on the appellant's conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the High Court's observations were unwarranted and that the unconditional apology tendered by the appellant was genuine, thus no further action was required.

Judgment Excerpts

The conduct of Central Government Advocate is highly deplorable to say the least. The affidavit of apology appears to be honest and genuine.

Procedural History

The appeal arose from SLP(C) No.14739 of 2006, with the High Court's order dated 22.06.2006 being the subject of review.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Tender Award in Cleaning Contract Dispute. Court upholds employer's right to reject non-responsive bids and award contract to lowest bidder meeting tender conditions.
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Allows Second Appeal and Remands Suit for Recovery of Possession for Fresh Adjudication; First Appellate Court's Decree Set Aside for Failure to Frame Points for Determination and Properly Prove Wills under Evidence Act.