1990 (4) TMI 284 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Suppression of material facts.
2. Abuse of judicial process.
3. Non-impleading of necessary parties.
4. Maintainability of the writ petitions.
5. Conduct of the petitioner Federation.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Suppression of Material Facts:
The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the petitioners suppressed material facts from the Court. The Federation, through its President, filed Writ Petition No. 507 of 1989 challenging the new promotion policy of the State Bank of India (SBI). The affidavit supporting the petition stated that no similar writ petition had been filed in any court. However, the Bank's counter affidavit revealed that a similar writ petition (No. 5286 of 1989) had been filed by the Federation in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which was admitted but the application for interim stay was rejected. Another writ petition was also filed in the Karnataka High Court by the State Bank of India Officers' Association (Karnataka). The petitioners' failure to disclose these facts was considered a deliberate suppression.

2. Abuse of Judicial Process:
The Court found that the Federation abused the judicial process by filing multiple writ petitions in different High Courts on the same issue. This tactic was seen as an attempt to obtain favorable interim orders by forum shopping. The Court emphasized that such practices are to be discouraged and noted that the Federation's actions were not in line with fair litigation practices.

3. Non-impleading of Necessary Parties:
The Bank argued that the writ petition was not maintainable as the 58 officers who had been promoted were not made parties to the petition. The Court observed that the Federation's statement that it did not know the names of the promoted officers was false. Evidence showed that these officers were known to the Federation, as they were impleaded in the Karnataka High Court petition and their names were published in a bulletin by an affiliated association.

4. Maintainability of the Writ Petitions:
Despite the preliminary objections, the Court decided not to dismiss the writ petitions outright. The Court acknowledged the technical arguments presented by the petitioners' counsel, who contended that any misstatements or defects were condoned by the Court's order on 26.4.89, which noted the withdrawal of the Andhra Pradesh High Court petition. The Court chose not to penalize the officers who might suffer from the new policy due to the Federation's misconduct.

5. Conduct of the Petitioner Federation:
The Court expressed strong disapproval of the Federation's conduct, noting that it had not come to Court with clean hands. The President's explanation for not knowing about the Andhra Pradesh High Court petition was deemed unbelievable. The Court criticized the Federation for making reckless and false statements in its affidavits and for employing litigation tactics unbecoming of a reputable association.

Conclusion:
The Court overruled the preliminary objections and decided to proceed with the writ petitions on their merits. The matter was adjourned for further hearing on 17.7.90. The Court took the opportunity to emphasize the importance of honesty and responsibility in legal proceedings and expressed hope that litigants would act more truthfully in the future.