Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, June 30: The Central Administrative Tribunal pulled the litigant on filing repeated pleas seeking same relief and observed that none has a right to unlimited drought upon the courts time and public money in order to get his issues settled as per his wishes.
These observations were passed by the Division Bench of M S Latief (J) and Prasant Kumar (M) while hearing an application filed by the applicant seeking withdrawal of his case. The withdrawal of case, however, was strongly objected by the Government counsel by arguing that the applicant has been filing successive petitions seeking therein same relief and the same is against the public policy.
The court has been informed by the Government counsel that the applicant has filed two more petitions before this court seeking the same relief and has concealed this fact before the court. “The issue of filing successive petition has been considered by the Supreme Court time and again and it held that even if the earlier Writ Petition has been dismissed as withdrawn, public policy which is reflected in the principles enshrined in law, mandates that successive Writ Petition may not be entertained for the same relief”, CAT bench said.
The Court observed that no litigant has a right to unlimited drought upon the Court’s time and public money in order to get his affairs settled in the manner he wishes. However, access to justice should not be exercised as a license to file petition after petition.
Referring the Supreme court in this connection, the Division Bench of CAT reiterated that filing successive, misconceived and frivolous petitions etc. interferes with the purity of the administration of law and such litigants must be dealt with heavy hand.
The bench after perusal of the relief claimed in all the three petitions said by and large are same, however, by adopting a crafty method of drafting, the applicant court added, has tried to escape the rigor of filing successive petitions.
“The petitioner has considered himself to be a valid licensee to use, misuse and abuse the process of Court by filing successive petitions and by trying his luck by filing successive petitions. Such a practice needs to be deprecated”, reads the judgment.
The court after hearing the matter at length was inclined to impose exemplary costs on the applicant for filing repeated petitions, in effect and substance, praying for the same relief. But, in the peculiar facts, the court while taking a lenient view and in future warned the applicant will not repeat this kind of conduct and refrained from imposing such costs.
The post CAT warns litigant for action on filing repeated pleas appeared first on Daily Excelsior.