Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2024 DIGILAW 427 (SC)

Anjumol v. A. VS Kerala Public Service Commission

2024-04-16

J.K.MAHESHWARI, SANJAY KAROL

body2024
ORDER During hearing of this case as well other cases, either on miscellaneous days or non-miscellaneous days, this Court is experiencing various practical difficulties, some of them are: (i) The orders passed in the proceedings are not attached to the paper books; (ii) In service matters, counsels for the petitioner are not attaching the relevant Rules with appendix in the SLP paper books or even not referring the same in pleadings. Some time, those Rules are being filed in piecemeal with applications or with additional documents, due to which matters are required to be postponed, which causes extra financial burden on the parties and delay in adjudication. (iii) Counter-affidavits are sometime attached to the main SLP paper book without flagging and inviting attention and sometime as separate paper book, which require unnecessary search and to waste time by Judges; (iv) On directions and after filing the convenience compilation, it is not sent to the residential offices of the Judges either in hard copy or by way of emailing and even during hearing. (v) The I.A. number has not been properly exhibited on its face. The applications are not attached date-wise with the paper books, which causes inconvenience to the Judges. (vi) Other ancillary issues are also coming in various paper books, which is causing difficultly in day to day Court functioning. 2. In view of above, we direct that the Secretary General and the Registry Officers, in particular the Registrar (Judicial) shall prepare standard operating procedure for properly maintaining the SLP paper books and to eradicate the said difficulties and be notified after seeking appropriate orders from Hon. the Chief Justice of India. We hope and trust, for efficient functioning of the Court, due compliance shall be made as expeditiously as possible. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and concluded the hearing. 4. Learned State counsel and the counsel appearing for the respondents pray for and are granted two week’s time to file affidavit clarifying how many persons have been appointed and what were their qualifications and what is the status of the petitioners in the present Special Leave Petition. 5. Parties are also directed to file brief notes of submissions within the same time. Reserved for orders. --------------- * (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-06-2019 in OP(KAT) No. 62 of 2017 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam)