Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2010 (1) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (1) TMI 1095 - SC - Indian LawsWhether L. P. Nathani could hold the august Office of the Advocate General of Uttarakhand in view of Article 165 read with Article 217 of the Constitution? Held that:- In the present case a practicing lawyer has deliberately abused the process of the court. In that process, he has made a serious attempt to demean an important constitutional office. The petitioner ought to have known that the controversy which he has been raising in the petition stands concluded half a century ago and by a Division Bench judgment of Nagpur High Court in the case of Karkare (supra) the said case was approved by a Constitution Bench of this court. The controversy involved in this case is no longer res integra. It is unfortunate that even after such a clear enunciation of the legal position, a large number of similar petitions have been filed from time to time in various High Courts. The petitioner ought to have refrained from filing such a frivolous petition. Allow the appeals filed by the State and quash the proceedings of the Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 689 (M/B) of 2001 filed in the Uttaranchal High Court.
|