SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 1418

RUMA PAL, P.VENKATARAMA REDDI
Manju Verma – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ruma Pal, J.-The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is an order passed by the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court transferring writ petition No. 1678(S/B) of 1998 (Dr. Manju Verma Vs. State of U.P. and others) from the Lucknow Bench of the High Court to Allahabad for hearing.

2. The respondent has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal was not maintainable under Article 136 of the Constitution. According to the respondent, the impugned order was not an "order" passed by a "Court" or a "Tribunal" within the meaning of Article 136, but was an order passed under paragraph 14 of the United Provinces High Courts (Amalgamation) Order 1948 on the administrative side. It is also submitted that the appropriate remedy of the appellant was under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Respondent has relied upon the decisions of this Court in Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd. 2002 (2) SCC 388, Rajasthan High Court Advocate s Association Vs. Union of India 2001(2) SCC 294 and State of Rajasthan Vs. Prakash Chand 1998 (1) SCC 1, to contend that the nature of the power conferred and exercised by the Chief Justice under paragraph 14














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top