(Judgment of the Court was made by RAJIV SHAKDHER, J) 1.W.P.SR.No.6949/2017 is directed against the directive of the Registry, dated 23.11.2016, whereby, said unnumbered writ petition was returned. Principally, the return dated 23.11.2016, got generated on account of the incongruity in the parties arrayed in W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016.
1.1. It is to be noted that the W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016 is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 03.10.2016.
2. The appellant, i.e., Mr.Diwakar, who appears in person had preferred a writ petition bearing W.P.No.9646 of 2016, in which he had sought a direction from the Court with regard to purported inaction on his complaint cum representation dated 28.12.2015. This complaint cum representation had been preferred by the appellant with the Commissioner of Police, who was arrayed as the sole respondent in the writ petition.
3. By virtue of the order dated 03.10.2016, the learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the writ petition lacked merit and accordingly, dismissed the same. While doing so, the learned Single Judge interalia made the following observations in paragraph No.3. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereafter:
“ ...3. The above explanation is accepted and further action against Mr.S.Parthasarathy, Appeal Examiner, is dropped. If the petitioner misbehaves with the staff in the Registry, the concerned Officer is advised to sent a written report to the Registrar General, who in turn shall forward the complaint to the Tamil Nadu Bar Council for disciplinary action.”
4. It appears that the appellant while filing the appeal took into account the said observations and, thus, proceeded to implead respondent Nos.2 and 3 i.e, the Registrar General of this Court and the Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu.
5. According to us neither are proper and necessary parties in the present proceedings. The reason, we have come to this conclusion, is that, W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016, as indicated above, has been preferred against the order dated 03.10.2016. As adverted to above, the writ petition was directed against the Commissioner of Police and not against respondent Nos.2 and 3, i.e., the Registrar General of this Court and the Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu.
5.1. Insofar as the observations made in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgement are concerned, these are, in a sense, not vital to the decision reached by the learned Single Judge. The observations, are at best suggestive of the fact that in case the appellant were to misbehave with the staff in future, the concerned officer of the Registry would file a written report with the Registrar General and who, in turn would forward a complaint to the Bar Counsel of Tamil Nadu.
5.2. These observations, came in the background of, Mr.S.Parthasarathy, an officer of this Court, submitting a report to the roster Judge, when, asked as to how a defective writ petition had got numbered. It is in this connection that Mr.S.Parthasarathy had alluded to the misbehaviour of the appellant i.e. Mr.S.Diwakar, in his report. To be noted, an extract of Mr.S.Parthasarathy's report is set out in paragraph 2 of the impugned judgement dated 03.10.2016, passed by the learned Single Judge. Since, what is stated in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgement is anticipatory in nature, we are of the view that at this stage, there is no necessity of having respondent No.2 and 3 as parties in W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016. We also note that the appellant i.e. Mr.S.Diwakar has not sought any relief by way of expunction of the observations made in paragraph No.3 of the impugned judgement.
6. Thus, having regard to the foregoing facts and circumstances, we are inclined to order deletion of respondent Nos.2 and 3, from the array of parties in W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016. It is directed accordingly.
7. The Registry will, consequently, number W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016 and place the same before the Court in the usual and ordinary course.
8. Resultantly, W.P.SR.No.6949 of 2017 has been rendered inefficacious.
It is accordingly, dismissed.
(R.S.A., J.) (V.P.N., J.) 21.09.2017 vsm
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
and V.PARTHIBAN, J.
vsm To
1. The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.
2. The Registrar General, High Court of Madras, High Court Campus, Chennai – 600 014.
3. The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, High Court Campus, Chennai – 600 104.
W.A.SR.No.76425 of 2016 and W.P.SR.No.6949 of 2017 21.09.2017