Article 191 of the Constitution provides that the Supreme Court may make rules regulating the practice and procedure of the Court. The rules made under the said Article by the Supreme Court are called the Supreme Court Rules 1980 (“Rules”). Under the said Rules, the powers of the Registrar are primarily covered under Order III Rule 10, Order V Rule 1(6), Order VII Rule 7 and Order XVII Rule 5, which simply regulate the practice and procedure of the Court and are merely administrative in character. The Rules empower the Registrar to ensure that the form and presentation of the petitions or the appeals are in order according to the Rules. The Registrar does not enjoy any power under the Rules to decide upon the maintainability of a petition or an appeal. The question of maintainability of a petition or an appeal is a justiciable issue that calls for adjudication, which is solely the prerogative of the Court in the exercise of its judicial power. A limited exception is, however, provided under Order V Rule 1 of the Rules where the Registrar enjoys the powers of the Court in deciding certain applications, etc., in pending cases. The power to deal with these applications, which though not under examination in the present cases, also appears to be procedural in nature and prima facie do not impinge upon the judicial power of the Court so as to decide upon the substantive justiciable issue(s) involved in the petitions or appeals.
Registrar cannot decide maintainability of petitions or appeals under the Supreme Court Rules 1980.
Order XVII Rule 5 of the Rules provides that the Registrar may refuse to receive a petition on the ground that it is “frivolous”. Frivolity of the petition is to be viewed by the Registrar in the overall constitutional construct of the Rules under Article 191 of the Constitution and within the administrative scheme of the Rules. A “frivolous” petition within the meaning of this Rule is limited to its form and presentation and no more. A petition whose form and presentation falls short in material particulars or which fails to refer to any provision of the Constitution, the law or the Rules under which it is purportedly filed will pass as “frivolous.”4 The Registrar in such a case can refuse to receive the petition unless the petitioner fixes the form and presentation of the petition. The said Rule, however, does not vest judicial power in the Registrar to adjudicate the justiciable issue of maintainability of a petition or appeal on the ground of it being frivolous.
It is underlined that even if a petition or an appeal is prima facie non-maintainable under the provisions of the Constitution, a law or the Rules referred to by the petitioner or appellant for filing the same, still the question of maintainability of the petition or the appeal under the referred provisions is to be adjudicated by the Court on the judicial side and not by the Registrar on the administrative side. Mere, prima facie non-maintainability of a petition or an appeal does not vest the jurisdiction in the Registrar to adjudicate upon the question of maintainability of such a petition or an appeal. Nor can the administrative powers of the Registrar under the Rules be employed to refuse receiving and registering such petitions or appeals which appear to him as non-maintainable. However, the Court can discourage the filing of outright non-maintainable, frivolous and vexatious, petitions or appeals by imposing costs on the unscrupulous petitioners or appellants under Order XVII Rule 12 of the Rules.
C.M.Appeal.39/2021
0 Comments