Orissa HC issues SOP for judicial officers on extension pleas in time-bound cases, bars direct SC communication
The move is aimed to bring uniformity and transparency to the extension process in time-bound cases, ensuring judicial discipline and institutional oversight in compliance with the Supreme Court's directive.
The SOP, notified by registrar general Asanta Kumar Das, is in response to observations made by the apex court in a case on May 23. The court expressed concern over direct communications from trial court judges to its registry, a practice deemed 'wholly unacceptable'. It clarified that such communications must be routed through the high court's registry.
The newly issued SOP mandates that all judicial officers, including district judges and judges of family courts, must submit extension requests via official email and regular mode to the registrar (judicial) of the high court. These requests must include case details, current status, reasons for delay and the period of extension sought, formatted as per a prescribed annexure.
For cases monitored by the Supreme Court, the high court registrar (judicial) will forward the request to the appropriate officer in the apex court's registry. Direct communication by any presiding officer with the Supreme Court registry is strictly prohibited.
The SOP emphasises accountability, stating that repeated or unjustified delays may invite administrative scrutiny. Further, district judges and the registrar (judicial) are tasked with monthly monitoring of such cases and maintaining records for periodic reporting to the court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC seeks Centre, BCI response on PIL for four yrs LLB course like B Tech
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the response of the Centre, University Grants Commission and Bar Council of India on a PIL seeking a direction for setting up a legal education commission to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the LLB and LLM courses. SC seeks Centre, BCI response on PIL for four yrs LLB course like B Tech A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi sought the response of the Centre, UGC, BCI and Law Commission of India on the petition by September 9. The top court directed the registry to list all the pending matters on the issue together on September 9. The PIL filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay urged the top court to direct to the Centre to set up a legal education commission or expert committee to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the LLB and LLM Courses and take appropriate steps to attract the best talent in the legal profession. The plea further said, "New Education Policy 2020 promotes four-year graduation courses in all professional and academic courses, but BCI has not taken appropriate steps to review the existing syllabus, curriculum and the duration of the LLB and LLM courses". It said the injury caused to the students is extremely large because the five-year duration of BA-LLB and BBA-LLB courses is disproportionate to the course material. "The long period puts excessive financial burden on the middle and lower-class families and they are unable to bear such a heavy financial burden. It takes two more years for a student to become the bread-earner in his family," the plea said. "B. Tech through IITs takes four years of non-superfluous education and that too in a specified field of engineering, whereas BA-LLB or BBА-LLB through the NLU's and various other affiliated colleges consumes five years of a student's precious life while provid ing knowledge of Arts /Commerce, an unrelated and superfluous stream. Hence, the existing five-year course needs to be reviewed by the experts," it said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC seeks Centre, BCI response on PIL for four-year LLB course like B.Tech
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the response of the Centre, University Grants Commission and Bar Council of India on a PIL seeking a direction for setting up a legal education commission to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the LLB and LLM courses . A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi sought the response of the Centre, UGC, BCI and Law Commission of India on the petition by September 9. The top court directed the registry to list all the pending matters on the issue together on September 9. The PIL filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay urged the top court to direct to the Centre to set up a legal education commission or expert committee to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the LLB and LLM Courses and take appropriate steps to attract the best talent in the legal profession. The plea further said, " New Education Policy 2020 promotes four-year graduation courses in all professional and academic courses, but BCI has not taken appropriate steps to review the existing syllabus, curriculum and the duration of the LLB and LLM courses". Live Events It said the injury caused to the students is extremely large because the five-year duration of BA-LLB and BBA-LLB courses is disproportionate to the course material. "The long period puts excessive financial burden on the middle and lower-class families and they are unable to bear such a heavy financial burden. It takes two more years for a student to become the bread-earner in his family," the plea said. "B. Tech through IITs takes four years of non-superfluous education and that too in a specified field of engineering, whereas BA-LLB or BBА-LLB through the NLU's and various other affiliated colleges consumes five years of a student's precious life while providing knowledge of Arts /Commerce, an unrelated and superfluous stream. Hence, the existing five-year course needs to be reviewed by the experts," it said.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Gujarat HC dismissed petition seeking reconstitution of UCC committee
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Surat resident Abdul Vahab Sopariwala that contested the composition of a five-member committee, appointed by the state government, to assess the need for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in the state that did not include any member from minority communities. While Justice Niral Mehta pronounced the petition as 'dismissed', a detailed court order is awaited. The said committee was appointed by the Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel-led state government on February 4 this year. Sopariwala had made representations to the Chief Minister before moving the high court in April, seeking reconstitution of the committee on the ground that it does not include members from religious minorities — who were important stakeholders in the implementation of the UCC. As per Sopariwala, it was necessary to ensure a diverse opinion on the subject as the lack of such adequate representation would amount to violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. The UCC committee in Gujarat is chaired by retired Supreme Court judge Justice Ranjana Desai and comprises retired IAS officer CL Meena, advocate R C Kodekar, former Veer Narmad South Gujarat University vice-chancellor Dakshesh Thakar and social activist Geetaben Shroff.
