ASOK PANDE Vs. ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr Ashok Pandey, a member of the Bar, has petitioned this Court in a public interest litigation. He has a grievance with the use of the appellation 'Justice' as a prefix and in the use of the expression to denote a Judge other than the Chief Justice, in the cause list and other documents. A mandamus is sought in the following terms:

(2.) Chapter V of the Constitution relates to the High Courts in the States. Article 214 provides that there shall be a High Court for each State. Article 216 provides that every High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other Judges as the President may, from time to time, deem it necessary to appoint. Based on these provisions of Article 216, the submission of the petitioner is that whereas the Constitution does contemplate a 'Chief Justice', the other Judges of the High Court are not denoted as Justices. Hence, it has been submitted that, apart from the Chief Justice whose office is denoted by the use of the expression Justice, the other Judges of the High Court must be referred to as Judges simplicitor and not as Justices in all official documents pertaining to the High Court.

(3.) In order to consider the merits of the submission, it would be worthwhile to explore the history of the expression 'justice'. The expression justice is derived from the Latin expression justitia which means righteousness or equity1. The expression has been intended to indicate the exercise of an authority in vindication of right by assigning reward or punishment. In another sense, the expression signifies the quality of being fair and just. Since 1200 AD, the word began to be used in English as a title for judicial officers. The expression 'justice of the peace' was first used in the early fourteenth century. The expression which means to do justice to someone or something came to be used since the seventeenth century to denote the act of rendering fully and fairly showing due appreciation. Justice, meaning the exercise of authority in vindication of right by assigning reward or punishment is an expression which is over eight hundred and sixty years old. Apart from the word justitia, which traces its origin in the Latin expression that signifies righteousness and equity, a similar word with a Latin root was jus'tis, meaning thereby something which is upright and just. The original meaning of the expression in Latin and in French was adapted into old English to signify a title for judicial officers. In the English language as well, justice came to signify both the judicial administration of law or equity as well as persons administering the law. By the late sixteenth century, justice became personified, represented by a portrayal of a Goddess in painting and sculpture holding balanced scales and sword. She appeared blindfolded to symbolize the impartiality of true justice. Over time, justice began to be defined as the quality or principle of just dealing and conduct, including values, such as impartiality, fairness, objectivity and integrity. These are values which are attached both to the system of administering justice as well as to persons who are in charge of the administration of justice. In a constitutional set up, the expression justice is infused with a notion that all administration of law must be based on principles of fair and reasonable treatment. This requires a sense of objectivity, fair behaviour, integrity and dispassionate application of law to facts on the part of the adjudicating officer.