DALIP SINGH GILL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, through this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India made three fold prayer :-

(2.) Succinctly concluding from the warp and weft of the petition for disposing the petition, the following facts can be woven from the point of view of the petitioner. The petitioner averred that he engaged one of the respondents, to file a writ petition challenging the removel of his son from the post of a Judicial Officer i.e. Subordinate Judge. The respondent later elevated to bench and did not file the writ petition. and advised to wait, as he told the petitioner that since in view of talk he had with a named Judge who was against the petitioner's son, the petitioner could not get relief till the named Judge is on the Bench. It is averred that on his elevation, he got his brother and daughter engaged as petitioner's counsel on a payment of Rs. 7000.00 as the fee. in spite of the fact that he had already charged Rs. 18,000.00 as his fee and no writ petition was filed by him. Vaguely filing of writ by the later counsel was admitted. Inactivity on the part of petitioner's counsel to get an appropriate relief to petitioner's son, in spite of his getting reliefs to some other litigants was attributed. Lastly a bald assertion was made in the petition that the wards or relations of Judges practising in the High Court are having roaring practice which is disproportionate to their merits.

(3.) The petitioner in a state of frenzy with a zeal to support his prayers made reference to various news items published from time to time. Speech of President of the Bar Association for transfer of all Judges, statement reported to have been made by the ex Chief Justice, Venkataramiah. with respect to Judges' succumbing to local pressures, their wards building practice disproportionate to their merits, their wining and dining outside and their attending lavish parties was referred to in the petition. Reference with respect to 4 to 5 Judges was made out of 90 with respect to whom retired Chief Justice had made the alleged statement.