Factual and Procedural Background
The opinion is an order passed after leave was granted in an appeal before the Supreme Court of India.
During the proceedings, learned counsel for the appellant cited a prior decision of the Supreme Court in
U.P. State Coop. Land Development Bank Ltd. v. Chandra Bhan Dubey, reported in (1999) 1 SCC 741.
Specific reliance was placed on a passage at page 758 of that report, which had already been quoted in an earlier
order of the Court dated 9-8-1999.
In this order, the Court does not adjudicate the substantive dispute between the parties. Instead, it considers the
significance of the legal view expressed in the cited passage and decides on the need for consideration of that view
by a larger Bench, as it involves interpretation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Legal Issues Presented
-
Whether the legal view expressed in the passage at page 758 of
U.P. State Coop. Land Development Bank Ltd. v. Chandra Bhan Dubey (1999) 1 SCC 741,
concerning the interpretation of Article 226 of the Constitution, requires consideration by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent |
Rule or Principle Cited For |
Application by the Court |
| U.P. State Coop. Land Development Bank Ltd. v. Chandra Bhan Dubey, (1999) 1 SCC 741 |
A passage at page 758, which contains a view involving the interpretation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
|
The appellant's counsel relied on this passage, which had been quoted in an earlier order dated 9-8-1999.
The Court found that the view expressed in that passage requires consideration by a larger Bench because it
involves the interpretation of Article 226, and on that basis directed that the papers be placed before the
Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.
|
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court notes that learned counsel for the appellant strongly relied on a particular passage at page 758 in the
judgment of U.P. State Coop. Land Development Bank Ltd. v. Chandra Bhan Dubey, which had already been
reproduced in the Court's earlier order dated 9-8-1999. Upon considering this passage, the Court forms the opinion
that the view expressed therein is of such importance and consequence that it should not be finally acted upon without
examination by a larger Bench.
The key factor influencing this conclusion is that the passage in question involves the interpretation of a
constitutional provision, namely Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Given the constitutional dimension,
and the significance of Article 226 in the Indian legal framework, the Court considers it appropriate that a larger
Bench undertake a detailed examination of the correctness and implications of the view expressed in that passage.
On this reasoning, the Court refrains from resolving the underlying substantive issues in the present proceeding and,
instead, focuses on the procedural step necessary to secure authoritative guidance: it decides that the matter should
be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders regarding reference to a larger Bench.
Holding and Implications
The Court's operative directions are:
(1) LEAVE GRANTED; and (2) THE PAPERS BE PLACED BEFORE THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS
IN VIEW OF THE NEED FOR CONSIDERATION BY A LARGER BENCH OF THE VIEW EXPRESSED AT PAGE 758 OF
U.P. STATE COOP. LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. v. CHANDRA BHAN DUBEY REGARDING ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION.
The immediate implication is that the case will not be finally decided by the current Bench. Instead, the Chief Justice
of India will take appropriate steps, which may include constituting a larger Bench to consider the correctness of the
view on Article 226 expressed in the cited precedent. The order thus has a procedural effect, initiating a potential
reference to a larger Bench, and does not itself lay down any new substantive precedent.
Show full summary ...