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

2022 Supreme(AP) 150

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, JJ.
‘A’ Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati - Petitioner
Versus
High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Represented by the Registrar General, High Court, Nelapadu, Amaravati, Guntur - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 21419 of 2021
Decided On : 11-03-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Byrapaneni Suyodhan.
For the Respondent: Mr. S.S. Nageswara Reddy.

Point of Law: Public have an interest, an abiding and a real interest, and a vital stake in the effective; and orderly administration of justice, because, unless justice is so administered, there is the peril of all rights and liberties perishing.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950– Articles 14, 21and 226 - Draft Notice and Annexures - Issue writ of certiorari - Petitioner was controlling officer of entire judicial section in High Court of Andhra Pradesh and section processed COMS and CS in its regular course - Petitioner worked allegedly with utmost diligence and commitment in accordance with established practices high court rules standing orders roster directions issued by honourable judges from time to time and always strived to uphold - Majesty of honourable court in discharging his duties and functions in accordance with law.

Finding of the Court:

Petitioner who was Registrar (Judicial) discharging his judicial and administrative functions having control over judicial sections in High Court not directly connected with postings etc but placed a note before single Judge - Such placing a note would not amount to acting adverse to interest of the judicial institution or advise the learned single Judge of the Court - Action of petitioner is in interest of institutional integrity but not otherwise - That too placing note by giving information about cost of paper publication is not with any malafide intention but only to comply with direction subject to direction for deposit of amount required for publication of notification - Therefore such act of petitioner/Registrar (Judicial) is neither required for adjudication of real controversy is only for rendering speedy justice.

Result: Closed.

JUDGMENT :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. The petitioner who is presently working as Registrar (Recruitment) and previously worked as Registrar (Judicial) of High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue writ of certiorari declaring the observations made in Orders dated 05-08-2021 and 16-08-2021 by the Hon'ble Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court in COMS Nos. 1 & 2 of 2020 and CS No. 3 of 2019 and consequential actions/orders if any, as illegal, arbitrary, irrational and as being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently expunge and set aside the observations made in the orders 05-08-2021 and 16-08-2021 and any consequential actions/orders, if any.

2. The petitioner was the controlling officer of entire judicial section in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the section processed COMS Nos. 1 and 2 of 2020 and CS No. 3 of 2019 in its regular course. The petitioner worked allegedly with utmost diligence and commitment in accordance with the established practices, high court rules, standing orders, roster directions issued by the honourable judges from time to time and always strived to uphold The Majesty of the honourable court in discharging his duties and functions in accordance with law.

3. The petitioner contended that, COMS Nos. 1 and 2 of 2020 and CS No. 3 of 2019 were listed before the Hon'ble Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court on 22-07-2021 and the Hon'ble Single Judge was pleased to pass an Order concerning the matter, the relevant portion of the same is extracted hereunder :

    "The intending bidders may inspect the first defendant Vessel at Kakinada Harbour between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. on all working days from 05.08.2021 onwards to 13-08-2021. The intending bidders shall leave a request in writing to the Harbour Master, Kakinada Seaports Limited, Kakinada, one day in advance suggesting the date on which they intend to carry out the inspection and the authorities of Kakinada Port Trust shall give access to such intending bidders upon satisfying of their identity and also as to the purpose of inspection of this Vessel. Expenses relating to this inspection incurred by Kakinada Seaport Limited, if any, shall be borne by the intending bidders.

Publish in TIMES OF INDIA and FINANCIAL EXPRESS having All India circulation by 05-08-2021 and copies of the same shall be filed into the Registry by 05-08-2021. Bids shall be submitted by 20-08-2021 and opening the bids is on 02-09-2021. The successful bidder shall pay the balance bid amount on or before 16-09-2021.

Publication shall also carry out the proforma of the bid document. All the parties to the Suits are permitted to publicize the proposed sale of the first defendant Vessel and third defendant Kakinada Seaports Limited, Kakinada shall post on its Website. The Kakinada Port Trust also is permitted to post this bid document on its official website.

The third defendant Kakinada Seaports Limited, Kakinada is directed to deposit Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs) to the credit of the Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati tentatively to meet the publication expenses, and in case, these expenses exceed the above sum, the company shall pay such further sum required within the time directed by the Registry. All the expenses incurred by Kakinada Seaport Limited, Kakinada the third defendant, shall be defrayed from sale proceeds, realized upon sale of the first defendant Vessel first and balance alone shall be available for distribution for those entitled to.

List on 05.08.2021.”

4. It is submitted that the Order dated 22-07-2021 was brought to the petitioner’s notice on 24-07-2021 at about 1:30 P.M. Upon perusing the record and the Order of the Hon'ble Single Judge, the petitioner issued necessary instructions on the same day and the file was marked to Sr

                          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 Back to top