Supreme Court sets aside order, asks Madhya Pradesh High Court to reconsider its ruling

Supreme Court sets aside order, asks Madhya Pradesh High Court to reconsider its ruling

Article 136 in the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court with a special power to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment or order or decree in any matter or cause, passed or made by any Court or Tribunal

The Supreme Court on 1 February 2021 ruled that the approach of Article 136 of the Constitution cannot be adopted while deciding petitions by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

A two judges' bench, comprising of Justices SK Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed while hearing an appeal filed against an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, assailing the order of the Board of Revenue, Gwalior. The Top Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back for the High Court's reconsideration for proper recording of the reasons and the parties' submission (Sunita Agrawal - Petitioner and Bhanwarlal and Another- Respondent).

The Apex Court noted that while the High Court had stated that the parties involved had advanced contentions at length, those submissions have not been reflected in its order. The Court opined that it was not necessary, in a matter like this, to record elaborate reasons but since these matters are carried forward to Supreme Court, the reasons have to be recorded to facilitate the Court to understand what weighed with the Judge while dismissing the petition.

The Court, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back for the High Court's reconsideration so that the order to be passed one way or the other, records reasons for the same, even if they are brief. The Court further directed that the matter should be heard by another judge.

Article 136 in the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court with a special power to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment or order or decree in any matter or cause, passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India. Being a discretionary power conferred to the Supreme Court of India, the court may in its discretion refuse to grant leave to appeal.

Article 227 of the Constitution determines that every High Court shall have superintendence over all Courts and Tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction (except a court formed under a law related to armed forces). Under the said Article, the High Court may call for returns from such courts, make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the proceedings of such courts, and prescribe forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such courts.

In the aforementioned case, Court in its order observed, "The approach of Article 136 of the Constitution cannot be adopted while deciding petitions by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India!"

"We are thus constrained to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back for reconsideration so that the order to be passed one way or the other records reasons for the same, albeit even if they are brief. In view of what has transpired in the impugned order, it would be in the fitness of things that the matter is placed before another learned Judge," added the Court while allowing the appeals.