Stay on his transfer of Rajiv Dhaiya by Rajasthan High Court.
Around 64 cases in various High Courts and Supreme Court were filed.
Supreme Court forced an exemplary cost of Rs. 25 lakhs.
The State of Rajasthan moved before the SC against the order of stay.
Supreme Court directed the High Court to bring into notice the orders passed by them.
In this present article, we will read about the contempt of court that was done by Rajiv Dhaiya, chairperson of NGO Suraz India Trust who has filed almost around 64 suits in different courts. Further, we will also look into the direction passed by the Apex Court to Rajasthan High Court take into account or notice the orders that are passed by them.
Rajiv Dhaiya, chairperson of NGO Suraz India Trust approved an interim order by the Rajasthan High Court on stay on his transfer dispensed by the Rajasthan government.
In the year May 2017, Supreme Court forced an exemplary cost of Rs. 25 lakhs on the NGO for filing around 64 cases in various High Courts and Supreme Court. CJI JS Khehar had restricted the Trust & its Chairman, Rajiv Dahiya from filing any case, including PIL before any Court.
On March 26, 2021, the State of Rajasthan moved before the SC against the order of stay on transfer passed by the HC.
The Bench on April 12 called for an affidavit from the government of Rajasthan to disclose the nature of employment that Rajiv Dhaiya, chairperson of NGO Suraz India Trust, clasps with it and expounding whether the activities being carried on by him are allowable. The court while hearing stated that it perused the affidavit filed by State.
Senior Advocate Manish Singhvi, counsel for the State of Rajasthan submitted in his reply that they have suspended him, transferred him, and even started disciplinary proceedings against him under appropriate and relevant rules.
Rajiv Dhaiya was directed to place on record his current sources of income, as he had submitted before the court that he is in the Government job. He was also ordered to present a complete list of his movable and immovable assets if any along with his last salary slip which shows the emoluments received by him and deductions being claimed.
On April 5, Mr. Dhaiya submitted that a government job refers to fact that he was a stenographer in a legal office but deployed with the State of Rajasthan. The Court asked the State of Rajasthan to verify the fact about the non-cooperative attitude of Mr. Daiya.
Court’s direction to Rajasthan High Court
The Bench headed by Justice SK Kaul and Justice Hemant Gupta
The Supreme Court has directed the High Court to bring into notice the orders that are passed by them and if required file an appropriate SLP be filed before SC with any interim orders subsisting tagged in the present matter.
How judiciary prevents multiple suits on the same subject matter?
Many a time it has been seen that the judiciary faces various issues while deciding cases especially when the question is in relation to law and no proper is provided for the same in Indian laws. Likewise, another most famous issue is the filing of multiple suits on the same subject matters by the same parties. The judiciary has adopted the doctrine of Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice to deal with such issues.
The term Res Judicata is a Latin term and means things have been judged by court already between the same parties. Therefore, another court is bound to dismiss the case as it no longer fits the appeal. The rule bars the institution of the suit on the same subject matter under the same title. The basic objective behind such a doctrine is to ensure the smooth functioning of the Indian judiciary.
The doctrine of Res Judicata is a shortened version of the legal maxim “Res Judicata Pro Veritate Accipitur”. The English common law concept was derived from the superseding concept of Judicial Economy, finality, and consistency. Later the Indian Legal system indoctrinated this concept under section 10 that bars the power of the concurrent court to try a subsequent suit if the previously instituted suit is pending in the same court. In the same way, section11 states that once the matter is finally decided by a capable court, no such court shall try any subsequent suit or issue which has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties and their privies litigating under the same title. Section 12 is based upon the principle that the defendant should not be irked twice for one and the same cause, also disentitles the plaintiff who is barred by the statutory rules to institute a further suit in respect of the same cause of action.
Filing multiple suits by the same person in respect of the same subject matter is nothing but an abuse of the court process which creates a factual scenario where a party is pursuing the same matter by two court processes.
It is a settled law that a litigant has no right to pursue pari passu two processes which will have the same effect in two courts at the same time with a view of obtaining victory in one of the processors in both.
Since Supreme Court is the highest and has the persuasive value of a decision passed it over the HC and any court subordinate to it. So, in the same respect, any order which is passed by SC must be taken into by the HC before passing any decision.