Skip to content

ADVOCATETANMOY LAW LIBRARY

Research & Library Database

Primary Menu
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Countries198
    • National Constitutions: History, Purpose, and Key Aspects
  • Judgment
  • Book
  • Legal Brief
    • Legal Eagal
  • LearnToday
  • HLJ
    • Supreme Court Case Notes
    • Daily Digest
  • Sarvarthapedia
    • Sarvarthapedia (Core Areas)
    • Systemic-and-systematic
    • Volume One
05/04/2026
  • Law

‘Why did you raise this point’- SC rebuked, imposed fine on lawyer while dismissing petition complaining bias on part of Registry

'Why did you raise this point?' The bench asked the petitioner during the last hearing. The lawyer said that the cases of prominent  and influential lawyers were listed, but not cases of lawyers who were not reputable. He further petitioned that his another petition for seeking an order for One Nation One Ration Card was not listed for hearing while less important matters were listed filed by some influential sections.
advtanmoy 06/07/2020 2 minutes read

© Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Supreme court of India

Home » Law Library Updates » Sarvarthapedia » Law » ‘Why did you raise this point’- SC rebuked, imposed fine on lawyer while dismissing petition complaining bias on part of Registry

A virtual Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra on Monday dismissed a writ petition seeking to order the Secretary-General and the Registrar, for not giving priority to any reputed or influential lawyer. The Apex Court has issued the verdict by a phone call. The Supreme Court directed the petitioner not to charge the registry of being biased.  Justice Arun Mishra heard the arguments from lawyer Reepak Kansal and other parties and adjourned the matter to Monday.

‘Why did you raise this point?’ The bench asked the petitioner during the last hearing. The lawyer said that the cases of prominent and influential lawyers were listed, but not cases of lawyers who were not reputable. He further petitioned that his another petition for seeking an order for One Nation One Ration Card was not listed for hearing while less important matters were listed filed by some influential sections.

The Top court while imposing a fine of Rs 100/- on the lawyer, cautioned that being a member of Bar he should not pick up allegations against the Registry of the Supreme Court. The virtual court asked him to be responsible henceforth and ask to appreciate that fact that the officers of the Supreme court have been working day and night for the lawyers. It further commented that now it became a trend to accusing the registry for not listing cases.

Read Next

  •  Judicial office is essentially a public trust: Supreme Court
  • Disclosure of Personal Information under the Right to Information Act, 2005
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest (26th Jan 2026)


Tags: featured

Post navigation

Previous: Know the items which can not be imported into Saudi Arabia under any condition
Next: Statement of MEA on Davol-Wang Yi border discussion: PLA stepped back one KM from LAC
Communism
Sarvarthapedia

Manifesto of the Communist Party 1848: History, Context, and Core Concepts

Arrest
Sarvarthapedia

Latin Maxims in Criminal Law: Meaning, Usage, and Courtroom Application

Biblical Basis for Slavery: Old and New Testament Laws, Narratives, and Interpretations

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

Origin of Central Banking in India: From Hastings to RBI and the History of Preparatory Years (1773–1934)

Howrah District Environment Plan: Waste Management, Water Quality & Wetland Conservation

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023: Sections (1-358), Punishments, and Legal Framework

Bengali Food Culture: History, Traditions, and Class Influences

West Bengal Court-Fees Act, 1970: Fees, Schedules, and Procedures

WB Land Reforms Tribunal Act 1997: History, Features, Provisions, Structure, Powers and Functions

Civil Procedure Law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (1976)

  • Sarvarthapedia

  • Delhi Law Digest

  • Howrah Law Journal

  • Amit Arya vs Kamlesh Kumari: Doctrine of merger
  • David Vs. Kuruppampady: SLP against rejecting review by HC (2020)
  • Nazim & Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 1184)
  • Geeta v. Ajay: Expense for daughter`s marriage allowed in favour of the wife
  • Ram v. Sukhram: Tribal women’s right in ancestral property [2025] 8 SCR 272
  • Naresh vs Aarti: Cheque Bouncing Complaint Filed by POA (02/01/2025)
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS)
  • Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (BSA): Indian Rules for Evidence
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023
  • The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest
  • U.S. Supreme Court Orders
  • U.k. Supreme Court Orders
Biblical Basis for Slavery

Biblical Basis for Slavery: Old and New Testament Laws, Narratives, and Interpretations

Sarvarthapedia, Law and Legal Materials

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

Indian Government

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Sarvarthapedia

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

2026 © Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • About
  • Global Index
  • Judicial Examinations
  • Indian Statutes
  • Glossary
  • Legal Eagle
  • Subject Guide
  • Journal
  • SCCN
  • Constitutions
  • Legal Brief (SC)
  • MCQs (Indian Laws)
  • Sarvarthapedia (Articles)
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • FAQs
  • Library Updates