Kerala High Court warns of disciplinary action against its registry if cases are not listed as per roster

The Kerala High Court recently warned its registry officials that disciplinary action could be initiated against them if they do not list cases as per the roster unless otherwise ordered by the Chief Justice. [Nair Service Society & Anr. v. TK Gopalakrishnan Nair & Ors.].While issuing the words of caution, the division bench of Chief Justice AJ Desai and VG Arun pointed out that if listing of cases is not done properly, it would inconvenience both judges and advocates. "The office is duty bound to list matters before the concerned Judge strictly as per the roster, unless otherwise ordered by the Chief Justice. Any deviation from this direction, thereby causing difficulty to the Hon'ble Judges or Advocates appearing in the matter, will invite disciplinary action against the officials concerned," the Bench said. .The issue came to the notice of the Court when the appellants in a case before it submitted that their appeal along with certain connected petitions, were first listed before a single-judge on April 5. The single-judge ordered that all the cases be listed before the appropriate bench as per the roster. However, some of the cases were still listed before the same single-judge who did not have jurisdiction as per the roster, the appellants contended. This time, the single-judge heard some of the matters and ordered it to be listed as part heard. When matters are listed as part heard, the bench which listed it would be the only one hearing the matter till its conclusion even if the bench's jurisdiction changes.The appellants contended that the single-judge should not have heard the matters since the same judge had previously ordered them to be listed as per the roster. They argued that it will be in the interest of justice to hear all the matters together, strictly as per the roster..The Court agreed with the appellants. It noted that the single-judge in question was heading a division bench (bench of two judges) at the time. "The roster makes it clear that, if for any reason, a judge in a division bench has to sit single, he shall deal with those matters specified for such purpose in the roster itself. As per the roster, the learned Single Judge was supposed to deal with original petitions and writ petitions (civil) of the year 2014 only," the Court observed. .Therefore, the Court allowed the appeal and ordered that the cases be listed before the appropriate single-judge as per the current roster. It also quashed the orders passed by the previous single-judge. .The appellants were represented by Senior Advocate E Nandakumar and advocates Gopikrishnan Nambiar, K John Mathai, Joson Manavalan, Kuryan Thomas, Paulose C Abraham, Raja Kannan and Pranoy Harilal. The respondents were represented by Senior Advocates PB Krishnan and Joseph Kodianthara and advocate Biju PS.Senior Government Pleader KP Harish appeared for the State. .[Read Order]