Supreme Court pulls up centre for filing an application stating that a judgment records submissions that were not made

A Supreme Court bench of Justices Chandrachud and Surya Kant today pulled up the centre for filing an application for clarification in a judgment that was delivered in December 2021 pertaining to disciplinary proceedings of on officer from Central Police Reserve Force. The application for clarification stated that certain submissions recorded in the judgment as that of the Centre’s were never advanced by them.

The judgment pertaining to initiation of disciplinary proceedings against an officer with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), the court had held that initiating disciplinary proceedings against a person with mental disability would amount to indirect discrimination (Ravinder Kumar Dhariwal Vs Union of India)

When the application came up for hearing today, Justice Chandrachud remarked “The officer filed a 100 page affidavit, I have a record of it. Now there is an application saying that he did not make such submissions. Evert submission that we have recorded can be traced to the counter affidavit.”

Justice Chandrachud further pointed out that most of his judgments come out two weeks from the day they are reserved and that there was no question of lapse. He added that the judges make notes and that they take responsibility of their judgments. He remarked “An officer of DIG rank saying some submissions recorded in the judgment were not made by him? We feel very strongly about this. ASG Madhavi Divan appeared for the applicant.

On hearing the ASG the court recorded that “The judgment of this court dated December 17, 2021 pertains to the submissions made Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG, appearing on n behalf of the Union of India and other agencies.” The court noted that each of the submissions which have been inferred in the paragraphs have been specifically cross-referenced on the basis of the counter affidavit which was filed by the Union of India. The court further recorded that “To set the record state, it would be necessary to refer to the submissions as recorded within the judgment and the paragraphs of the counter-affidavit.” The court further remarked that “It needs to be clarified that during the course of the hearing, the ASG has drawn the attention of the court to the fact that the counter-affidavit has been filed by the Union of India setting out the detailed facts in the history of the case.” The court further recorded that the submissions which have been recorded are based on the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India.

Case title: Ravinder Kumar Dhariwal Vs Union of India