Untitled Document

Supreme Court of India

Writ Petition (Civil) No(S). 334 Of 2005

Shiva Kant Jha, Petitioner(s)
Union Of India & Anr., Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report )

Date: 28/11/2007 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

Coram :
Hon'ble The Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran
Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal

Mr. Gopal Subramanian, ASG (A.C.)
Mr. Aman Ahluwalia, Adv.

For Petitioner(s)                Mr. Shiva Kant Jha,
WP(C) 334/05                 Petitioner-In-Person

WP(C) 456/07                 Petitioner-In-Person (N.P.)

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following


Petitioner who appeared in person, has filed this petition. Though several reliefs are sought in the petition as recorded in the Order dated 25, 8. 2006, restricted the prayer in this petition to a re-look into the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra & Anr. (2002 (4) S.C.C.388.

We heard petitioner-in-person at length and learned Additional Solicitor General of India. Petitioner argued that all final decisions of this Court are subject to the remedy available under Article 32 of the Constitution. Petitioner contended that there may be occasions where the decisions of this Court may violate the fundamental rights of citizens and under those circumstances, the aggrieved should have remedy under Article 32 of the Constitution against such decisions. In support of his contentions, he referred to the views of several learned authors and the decisions of English Courts. It is not necessary to refer to them, as the question has been exhaustively considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra (supra).

Of course, the decision of this Court could be reviewed and if necessary varied in appropriate cases, as pointed out in Rupa Ashok Hurra. The decision of an earlier Bench could also be overruled by a larger Bench. But we do not accept the submission of the petitioner, that the decision of this Court which has attained finality could be subjected to judicial review under Article 32 of the Constitution, at the instance of one of the parties to the decision. We find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

W.P.(C) N0. 456/2007 is de-linked and adjourned.

(R.K.Dhawan)                                                                                                (Veera Verma)
Court master                                                                                                   Court Master

Shivakantjha.org - Links on Shivakantjha


Shivakantjha.org - Links on Shivakantjha

HomeShiva Kant JhaBhajan & SongsGopi Kant Jha, Autobiography of a Freedom FighterAncestorsReflections on the Constitution of IndiaBlogD.D.-G.K.J. TrustBhagavadgita Study CentreKrishna and his Bhagwat GitaOn The Loom of TimeJudicial Role in Globalised EconomyBooks & PublicationsArticles & PapersMy Parlour - Current Legal ProblemsDemocracyWatch India'In A Nutshell'TripletsLiteratureSpeechesCurrent Legal Problems Public Interest LitigationsOn Governance & PolityStray Thoughts & QuotesAudio-VisualsPhotographs

Untitled Document
© Shivakantjha.org. All rights reserved. Disclaimer