Kerala High Court Dismisses Appeal on Limited Case Listing Before Justice Mary Joseph
The Kerala High Court has dismissed an appeal by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, which challenged the limited listing of cases before the bench of Justice Mary Joseph.
A division bench, consisting of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, clarified that the listing of cases falls under the administrative side of the High Court’s prerogative. The bench observed,
“The Chief Justice is the authority to decide and if he does not decide, it does not give the appellant a cause of action to approach the Court by filing a writ petition.”
The Court further remarked,
“No one can dictate the Court regarding listing of cases. Number of cases listed is not relevant, as it is upon the Court to consider twenty or two hundred cases depending upon the complexity of the cases. Complaints can be filed even when two hundred cases are listed. Number of cases listed does not matter, the important aspect is that the litigants get a fair hearing.”
The Court also warned the lawyer against filing such cases against a sitting judge with ‘malafide intentions’. It expressed its disapproval of Shenoy naming Justice Joseph as a party to the proceedings, stating,
“Judges of the Court cannot be treated as a litigant who can answer all the allegations raised against them. If the appellant has a grievance, then he should have raised a complaint in the proper manner before the Chief Justice rather than rushing to file a writ petitions before the Court.”
Shenoy’s initial petition was dismissed by the High Court, which stated that no specific direction can be given regarding the number of cases a judge should hear daily.
During the appeal hearing, the Court highlighted the changed listing system, where all cases are now listed by posting urgent memos online. Shenoy, however, emphasized the significance of the issue, arguing that if the number of cases listed before judges is limited, it could potentially lead to corruption as people would vie for those limited slots. He stated,
“and then nothing would prohibit the judges from listing one case before them.”
The appellant further argued that the court’s registry had admitted that the causelist for Justice Joseph’s court was being prepared with her permission. He pointed out,
“The direction of the Supreme Court is clear that no judge can interfere with the listing of cases. Listing of cases is a process of the registry and no judge can interfere with that process.”
Shenoy also mentioned that no causelist in any High Courts or the Supreme Court is limited to just 20 matters a day.
The appeal also criticized the single-judge’s dismissal of his petition, suggesting that the judge had confused ‘listing’ with ‘hearing’. Shenoy stated,
“The single-judge, in violation of the precedents of the Supreme Court abused his powers as a judge and made a personal attack on the petitioner, who is also an advocate.”
Case Details:
- Case Title: Yeshwanth Shenoy v. The Chief Justice, High Court of Kerala & Ors.
- Case Number: WA 1316/ 2023 IN WP(C) 6912/ 2023.
