The Kerala High Court Advocates Association has written to the Chief Justice of India, urging him to decide about issues raised by senior lawyer Dushyant Dave on cases involving the Adani Group.
Incidentally, these cases were listed before the summer vacation benches of the Supreme Court earlier.
It may be recalled that on August 16, in a letter written on all Supreme Court judges, senior lawyer Dave had drawn attention to the “surprising” inclusion of senior-most judges in the vacation benches.
Dave had pointed out about the “swift manner” in which two cases linked to the Adani Group were taken up by a bench which included Justice Arun Mishra, and also referred to two other matters relating to the Adani Group heard earlier by Justice Mishra.
Dave had written in his letter to the Supreme Court lawyers that he would not comment on the merits of judgments delivered on cases related to the Adani Group, but mentioned that the total benefit to the Adani Group due to these two judgments would run into “thousands of crores” of rupees.
The letter written by the Kerala High Court Advocates Association has pleaded for follow-up action.
In a letter dated October 29, the Kerala High Court Advocates Association sought “appropriate resolution” on Dave’s letter “containing specific and serious allegations”. The Association has also called for appropriate action against senior lawyer Dushyant Dave if the allegations made by him are unfounded”.
In his August 16 letter Dave had written, “The Chief Justice of India surprised the entire legal fraternity when he constituted benches for the summer vacation for 2019 which included, besides himself, Honorable Justice Arun Mishra from amongst the senior-most of the judges. This was surprising because generally, if never, senior judges did not sit on vacation benches. Whatever may have been the justification, it has resulted in shocking outcomes in a few matters heard during the summer vacation”.
“It is disturbing that the Supreme Court of India should take up regular matters of a large corporate house during summer vacation in such a cavalier fashion and decide them in its favor. It raises very serious and disturbing questions as to whether the registry had sought concurrence from the Honorable Chief Justice for listing such matters and if not whether the registry became party to such listing in violation of its own practice and procedure. But most of all, why were the two matters listed before the bench presided by Justice Arun Mishra when other benches were available during May 2019 vacation?” Dave had mentioned in his letter.