Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
V. DHANAPALAN & G. CHOCKALINGAM, JJ.
Prisoners Rights Forum, represented by its Director P. Pugalenthi
Versus
High Court of Judicature at Madras, represented by the Registrar General High Court of Judicature at Madras
W.P.No. 14893 of 2014
Decided On : 11-08-2014
The High Court held that the Chief Justice has the prerogative to distribute the business of the High Court, both judicial and administrative, as he is the master of roster and, with such prerogative, he alone can constitute benches of the Court and allocate the cases to the benches so constituted. The fundamental conception of the court must be respected that it is a single indivisible institution of united purpose and existing solely for the high constitutional functions for which it has been created, thereby making of the roster and placement of cases before different benches indisputably to be the prerogative of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice has inherent power to allocate the business of the High Court and to constitute the benches for the purpose. Even on account of exceptional circumstances or to meet the extraordinary situation, it is for the Chief Justice to decide and allot the work by constituting a bench. It is also pertinent to note that even if a particular case is to be taken up by a particular bench and for constitution of the bench for that purpose, the Chief Justice alone can make the arrangements or re-arrangements of the benches and assign the work to that bench for determination. The arrangement of sittings and allotment of work are part of the domestic administration of High Court and the Chief Justice. When such a prerogative is vested with the Chief Justice and having represented to the Chief Justice, on filing a Public Interest Litigation by making the Registrar General as the respondent, praying for a direction to constitute a Special Bench, any issuance of such a direction would amount to issuing a direction to the Chief Justice and such a judicial authority is not available to the Court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, who is the Director of Prisoners Rights Forum, Chennai, a registered public Trust, with an object to create law awareness among the prisoners and to help them enforce their human rights, constitutional rights and legal rights, has filed this Public Interest Litigation Petition praying for a mandamus to the High Court to constitute a Special Bench for deciding the Habeas Corpus Petitions challenging the preventive detention of the prisoners, as there were 1360 prisoners detained in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, under Act 14 of 1982.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that no judicial review is available to the petitioner to file this PIL for a direction to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court, as the Hon'ble Chief Justice alone is the exclusive authority to take a decision on the need for constitution of a Special Bench, and not this Court. Under the circumstances, even on public interest, it is for the Hon'ble Chief Justice to decide about and the grievance of the petitioner cannot be redressed through any other recourse, such as this Public Interest Litigation, than what is mandated. As such, the Writ Petition cannot be entertained and the same is to be rejected.
Issues: Whether a mandamus can be issued against the High Court/Chief Justice in a Public Interest Litigation to constitute a Special Bench and such power of judicial review is available under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ?
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the Chief Justice has the prerogative to distribute the business of the High Court, both judicial and administrative, as he is the master of roster and, with such prerogative, he alone can constitute benches of the Court and allocate the cases to the benches so constituted. The fundamental conception of the court must be respected that it is a single indivisible institution of united purpose and existing solely for the high constitutional functions for which it has been created, thereby making of the roster and placement of cases before different benches indisputably to be the prerogative of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice has inherent power to allocate the business of the High Court and to constitute the benches for the purpose. Even on account of exceptional circumstances or to meet the extraordinary situation, it is for the Chief Justice to decide and allot the work by constituting a bench. It is also pertinent to note that even if a particular case is to be taken up by a particular bench and for constitution of the bench for that purpose, the Chief Justice alone can make the arrangements or re-arrangements of the benches and assign the work to that bench for determination. The arrangement of sittings and allotment of work are part of the domestic administration of High Court and the Chief Justice. When such a prerogative is vested with the Chief Justice and having represented to the Chief Justice, on filing a Public Interest Litigation by making the Registrar General as the respondent, praying for a direction to constitute a Special Bench, any issuance of such a direction would amount to issuing a direction to the Chief Justice and such a judicial authority is not available to the Court.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
V. Dhanapalan, J.
1. This Writ Petition is a Public Interest Litigation praying for a direction to the respondent to constitute a Special Bench for deciding the Habeas Corpus Petitions challenging the preventive detention under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act, 1982 (Act 14 of 1982).
2. The petitioner is the Director of Prisoners Rights Forum, Chennai, which is a registered public Trust vide Registration No.4319/2008. The objects of the Trust are to create law awareness among the prisoners and to help them enforce their human rights, constitutional rights and legal rights.
3. A Division Bench of this Court, on 05.06.2014 heard W.P.No.9401 of 2014, a Public Interest Litigation filed by the Prisoners' Right Forum for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing that a judicial inquiry be instituted into the attack of about 500 prisoners inside Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai occurred on 24th March 2014 and further directing initiation of appropriate departmental action against all those prison officials, who were responsible for the said attack on the prisoners, and reserved orders. During the course of hearing of the above Writ Petition, it was made clear to this Court that the attack on about 500 prisoners inside the Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai, occurred at about 3.30 p.m. on 24th March 2014 and a sequel to a hunger protest staged by those prisoners those who were detained under Act 14, demanding early disposal of their Habeas Corpus Petitions pending before this Court.
4. According to the petitioner, earlier, there were 1360 prisoners detained under the Act and confined in Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai as on 24.03.2014. Presently, there would be more than 1600 prisoners detained under the Act and confined in the said prison alone. Almost all the prisoners detained under the Act have come before this Court challenging their preventive detention by way of HCPs. Pendency of Habeas Corpus Petitions increases day by day and this Court finds it difficult to dispose of all the HCPs relating to preventive detention of hundreds of people in time. Constitution of a special Bench for disposing of such Habeas Corpus Petitions is a must considering the fact that a large number of prisoners have already completed more than 8 months out of 12 months of the total period of detention and that the Regular Bench which is burdened with the hearing of HCPs (for admissions) and non-statutory custody cases and Criminal Appeals (Admission and Final Hearing) apart from HCPs (Act 14 of 1982) would not be in a position to dispose of the said HCPs before the completion of the total period of 12 months by the concerned prisoners.
5. A representation dated 04.04.2014 has been made by the petitioner to the respondent herein, who is the Registrar General of this Court, requesting constitution of a Special Bench for hearing and disposing of the HCPs concerning the Act. Since the respondent-High Court has so far not constituted a Special Bench for the purpose of deciding the said HCPs in the interest of justice, the petitioner is before this Court with a PIL.
6. The respondent – Registrar General, High Court, Madras, has filed a counter affidavit to the following effect:
6.1. The content in the affidavit of the writ petitioner in respect of the number of prisoners detained under Act 14 of 1982 is a matter of prison record of which this office is not fully aware. A number of Habeas Corpus Petitions challenging preventive detention under the said Act have come to be filed before this Court. But the statement that this Hon'ble Court finds it difficult to dispose of the Habeas Corpus Petitions and that constitution of a Special Bench to dispose of such Habeas Corpus Petitions is a must is not a correct statement.
6.2. The petitioner made a representation dated 04.04.2014 to the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice of this Hon'ble Court, sugges
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
