PRIYANK CHANSORIA Vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the vires of some of the provisions of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008.

(2.) THE relevant facts briefly are that the State of Madhya Pradesh was formed by the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') on 1st November, 1956 and an order was issued by the President under the Act notifying the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur as the High Court of the State of Madhya Pradesh with its Principal Seat at Jabalpur. Section 54 of the Act provides that the Rules with regard to the practice and procedure of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur with necessary modifications would apply to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, until the High Court of Madhya Pradesh made rules and orders with respect to practice and procedure. In exercise of its powers under Section 54 of the Act and Art. 225 of the Constitution of India, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has now made new rules with respect to practice and procedure of the High Court called "the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008" (for short 'the Rules of 2008'), which have come into force with effect from 1st November, 2008. The Rules of 2008 are applicable to the practice and procedure not only of the Principal Seat of the High Court at Jabalpur but also of the permanent Benches of the High Court at Indore and Gwalior. Aggrieved by some of the provisions of the Rules of 2008, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE main challenge in the writ petition is to the classification of the writ petitions, which are to be heard by a learned single Judge of the High Court and which are to be heard by a Division Bench of the High Court. In Chapter-IV of the Rules of 2008 titled "jurisdiction of Benches", it is provided in Rule 1 (11) that all writ petitions under Art. 226 and/or Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, except those specified in Rule 2 (7) of the Chapter shall ordinarily be heard and disposed of by a Judge sitting alone and in Rule 2 (7) of Chapter IV, the classes of writ petitions, which shall be heard and disposed of by a Division Bench, have been listed. One such class of writ petitions to be heard by a Division Bench is writ petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the interlocutory and final orders passed by subordinate Courts or Tribunals where no appeal or revision is provided.