DESH RAJ Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have perused the order dt. 25/8/2023 passed by DB-I in these CWPOAs. The said order states as under:-

(2.) In State of Rajasthan Vs. Prakash Chand and other(1998) 1 SCC 1 in para 10 the ?upreme Court has held that the administrative control of the High Court vests in the Chief Justice of the High Court alone and that it is his prerogative to distribute business of the High Court, both judicial and administrative; that he alone, has the right and power to decide how the Benches of the High Court are to be constituted; which Judge is to sit alone and which cases he can and is required to hear as also as to which Judges shall constitute a Division Bench and what work those Benches shall do. The ?upreme Court declared that the Judges of the High Court can sit alone or in Division Benches and do such work only as may be allotted to them by an order of or in accordance with the directions of the Chief Justice; and that necessarily means that it is not within the competence or domain of any Single or Division Bench of the Court to give any direction to the Registry in that behalf which will run contrary to the directions of the Chief Justice.

(3.) This principle of law has been reiterated in several decisions of the ?upreme Court in Divine Retreat Centre vs. State of Kerala and others(2008) 3 ?CC 542, High Court of Karnataka vs. Commissioner of Customs and another3, State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Neeraj Chaubey and others (2010) 10 ?CC 320, State of Punjab vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and others (2011) 14 ?CC 770, Kishore Samrite vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2013) 2 ?CC 398 , Kamini Jaiswal vs. Union of India and another (2018) 1 ?CC 156 and Shanti Bhushan vs. Supreme Court of India through its Registrar and another. (2018) 8 ?CC 396