IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3870 of 2011 Harendra Pratap Singh, Advocate, Son of Sri Brahma Dayal Singh, „Freedom Fighter‟ and Late Shreemati Teeljharo Devi (Mother) Resident of village – Narbirpur, Panchayat – Narbirpur, Proposed Block – Narbirpur, Police Station – Koelawar, District – Bhojpur (Arrah), Proposed Division – Shahabad (Arrah), Present Address – 2A, Kamla Apartment, Kavi Raman Path, Purbee Boring Road, Patna (Near Ex-Chief Minister, Bihar, Late Satyendra Narayan Sinha) and Practicing as an Advocate, a member of Advocate‟s Association, Advocate‟s House, High Court, Patna, in the State of Bihar (In person). --------- Petitioner. Versus 1. The Hon‟ble Chief Justice, High Court, Patna. 2. The Registrar General, High Court, Patna. 3. The Registrar (Establishment), High Court, Patna. 4. The Joint Registrar (Judicial), High Court, Patna. 5. The Registrar (List and Computer), High Court, Patna. 6. The Hon‟ble Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. 7. The Registrar, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. 8. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Department of Law, Justice and Company Affairs in the Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi (Respondent No.9). 9. The Secretary, Department of Law, Justice and Company Affairs in the Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. 10. The Hon‟ble President of India, New Delhi. 11. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. (Respondent No.12). 12. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 13. The Principal Secretary, the Department of Cabinet Secretariat, Government of Bihar, Patna. 14. The Hon‟ble Governor, Bihar, Patna. 15. The Principal Secretary, Governor, Bihar, Patna. 16. The Hon‟ble Chief Minister, Bihar, Patna. 17. The Principal Secretary, Chief Minister, Bihar, Patna. 18. The Hon‟ble Speaker, Bihar Legislative Assembly, Patna. 19. The Secretary, Bihar Legislative Assembly, Patna. 20. The Hon‟ble Chairman, Bihar Legislative Council, Patna. 21. The Secretary, Bihar Legislative Assembly, Patna. ----------Respondents. ******** For the petitioner : Mr. Harendra Pratap Singh, Advocate (in person) For the respondent no. 11, 12, 13, 17 : Ms. Binita Singh, AC to AAG-I For the respondent no. 18, 19, 21 : Mr. Abhinay Raj, Adv. For the Union of India : Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, C.G.C. For Vidhan Parishad : Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha, Adv. For the High Court, : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Adv. (Respondent No. 01 to 05) 2 ******** 03. 09.05.2011 The petitioner is a lawyer in this Court, and has preferred this writ petition for the following reliefs: (I) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari of any other appropriate writ quashing the notification C.S. No. 132 dated 6th April, 2010 of Paragraph no. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(e) issued by High Court, Patna in Administrative Authority, wherein Addenda and Corrigenda of Patna High Court Rules 1916 has added the following as a new rule in part V of Chapter XXI – CC of Patna High Court Rules 1916 with Appendix – E (Annexure – 4,2). (II) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing C.S. No. 18 dated 19.12.1977 of paragraph no.4 (1), Part – II Chapter – III, General Rule regarding application and affidavits issued by High Court Patna in administrative authority under High Court Patna Rules (Annexure – 3). (III) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ commanding the respondent no. 1 to 5 to consider/amendment in notification C.S. No. 132 dated 06.04.2010 of Paragraph No. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(e) issued by Patna High Court (Annexure – 4) that: 2(a) ‘Chief Justice’ means the Chief Justice including the an Acting Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar. 2(b) ‘High Court’ means the Chief Justice and the judges of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar. 2(c) ‘Judges’ means Judge including an adhoc Judges, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar. 3 2(e) ‘Registrar General’ means Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar. On the basis of Article 214, Article 1(2) including First Schedule Constitution of India and Article 216, 217 and 223 including Part – D Para – II (a) Second Schedule Constitution of India and Article 230. (IV) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing/commanding the respondents no. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 to consider and implement Article 214 and Article 1(2) including First Schedule Constitution of India. Article 223 including part D para – 11(a) Second schedule Constitution of India and Article 230 in all the High Court in India. The name of State should be mention or written in every High Court in India. (V) For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing/commanding the respondents no. 01 to 05 to consider the name, tenure/period of the Hon’ble Chief Justice including the Hon’ble acting Chief Justice of High Court, Patna in the State of Bihar in front of the East Baranda of the Chief Justice Court Room No.1 including the Chief Justice Chamber, from the date of establishment on 09.02.1916 to till now from the record of office/section of High Court, Patna in Bihar at name plate on the basis of Reported in A.I.R. 1916 Patna to A.I.R. 2010 Patna and also reported in P.L.J.R. 1968 to P.L.J.R. 2010 and Article 217 and Article 223 of the Constitution of India and also Second Schedule Para – 11(a) of the Constitution of India. (VI) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing/commanding the respondents no.01 to 05 to consider/amendment in C.S. No. 18 dated 19.12.1977 of Paragraph no. 4(1) Part – II, Chapter – III that every petition and every affidavit with Annexure – 1, if any shall be entitled ‘in the High Court of 4 Judicature, Bihar at Patna’ or ‘In the Bihar High Court of Judicature at Patna because shall be called, shall be entitled and shall be written are different meaning by Annexure – 9. (VII) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing/commanding the respondents no. 06 to 21 and asked that the High Court of India including the High Court Patna in the State of Bihar have been under control and under working by the Constitution if India and the President of India and the Chief Justice of India is or not. But the name of State has been not mention or written with many High Courts in India on the basis of Article 214 of the Constitution of India. (VIII) For a declaration that the C.S. No. 132 dated 06.04.2010 of paragraph no. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(e) Annexure – 4 and C.S. No. 18 dated 19.12.1977 of paragraph no. 4(1) Annexure – 3) issued by High Court Patna in administrative authority is incomplete and incorrect the same is violative of the Constitution of India by India Article 214, Article 216, Article 217, Article 223 including second schedule paragraph no.11(a) and Article 1(2) including First Schedule and as such is impermissible in the eye of Constitution without mention or written the name of State Bihar i.e. The High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar or In the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Bihar and Appendix-E Letters Patent Constituting the High Court of Judicature at Patna is also incomplete and incorrect without mention or written the name of province Bihar and Orissa earlier. (IX) For restraining the respondents no. 1 to 5 from amending the C.S. No. 132 dated 06.04.2010 of paragraph no. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(e) and C.S. No. 18 dated 19.12.1977 of paragraph no. 4(1) by the High Court Patna in Administrative Authority Patna High Court Patna in Administrative Authority Patna High Court Rules 1916 during the pendency of the writ application on the basis 5 of Constitution provision in Article – 214, Article 216, Article 223 etc. of Constitution of India. (X) For issuance of any other appropriate writ, order or direction which your Lordships may fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case. 2. We have heard the petitioner in person at length. To the extent discernible from the elaborate submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears to us that in substance he prays for the following two reliefs-: (i) The Patna High Court exercising jurisdiction over the territories comprising the State of Bihar should be named as the High Court of Bihar, and (ii) The list of Chief Justices put up on the board outside the Court room of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice does not include the names of the Acting Chief Justices which may be included therein. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on various provisions of the Constitution, the Letters Patent of High Court of Judicature at Patna, the Patna High Court Rules, the Bihar Reorganization Act 2000 etc., and the following reported judgments:- (i) Emperor Vs. Sohrai Koeri, A.I.R. 1938 Patna 550. (ii) Full bench judgment of this court in Sayed Zafrul Hassan and another Vs. The State of Bihar, 1986 P.L.J.R. 274. (iii) Ashok Tanwar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2005 (2) SCC 104. 6 (iv) Anirudh Prasad Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar, 1996 (1) P.L.J.R. 633, and (v) Umaji Keshao Meshram Vs. Radhikabai 1986 (Supp.) SCC 401. 4. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner‟s first submission before us is that, in view of the importance of the issues raised in this writ petition, it should be referred to a larger Bench for consideration and authoritative pronouncement. Under the Patna High Court Rules, a Division Bench is competent to adjudicate issues relating to vires of a legislation. Secondly, in view of the law of precedents, an issue is normally referred to a larger Bench if the court notices a conflict of decisions of coordinate jurisdiction. No such case has been made out before us. We, therefore, do not consider it necessary to refer the present writ petition to a larger Bench for consideration. 5. On 09.12.1916, in exercise of the powers under Section 113 of the Government of India Act, 1915, the King of England issued Letters Patent constituting the High Court of Judicature at Patna for the then State of Bihar comprising of the present States of Bihar, Orissa, and Jharkhand, which continued to exercise jurisdiction over the States of Orissa and Jharkhand till 7 the dates indicated below, and is now the High Court for the present State of Bihar. Clause-1 of the Letters Patent is headed “Establishment of High Court at Patna”, and provides that there shall be a High Court in the province of Bihar and Orissa which have been described as the High Court of Judicature at Patna. On 01.04.1936, the present State of Orissa was carved out and constituted as a separate State in India. The High Court of Judicature at Patna continued to exercise jurisdiction over the State of Orissa until the Orissa High Court was inaugurated on 26.07.1948. Subsequently, in view of the provisions of Bihar Reorganization Act 2000, the present State of Jharkhand was carved out of the then State of Bihar as a separate State in the Union of India. As per the provisions of the Letters Patent, the Patna High Court has all through been described as the High Court of Judicature at Patna to which the petitioner raises a grievance taking clue from Section 25 of 2000 Act, wherein the High Court is named as the High Court for the State of Jharkhand. He prays for appropriate amendment in the Constitution of India, as well as various provisions of the Patna High Court Rules, so that the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which exercises jurisdiction over the present State of Bihar, 8 should be named after the State itself, as has happened in the State of Jharkhand and some of the other High Courts in India. 6. Such an approach completely overlooks the provisions of Article 372 of the Constitution which reads as follows:- 372. Continuance in force of existing laws and their adaptation – (1) Notwithstanding the repeal by this Constitution of the enactments referred to in article 395 but subject to the other provisions of this Constitution, all the laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the Commencement of this Constitution shall continue in force therein until altered or repealed or amended by a competent legislature or other competent authority. (2) For the purpose of bringing the provisions of any law in force in the territory of India into accord with the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by order make such adaptations and modifications of such law, whether by way of repeal or amendment, as may be necessary or expedient and provide that the law shall, as from such date as may be specified in the order, have effect subject to the adaptations and modifications so made, and any such adaptation or modification shall not be questioned in any court of law. (3) Nothing in clause (2) shall be deemed – (a) to empower the President to make any adaptation or modification of any law after the expiration of (three years) from the commencement of this Constitution; or (b) to prevent any competent Legislature or other competent authority from repealing or amending any law adapted or modified by the President under the said clause. Explanation I – The expression ‘law in force’ in this article shall include a law passed or made 9 by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that it or parts of it may not be then in operation either at all or in particular areas. Explanation II - Any law passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India which immediately before the commencement of this Constitution had extra- territorial effect as well as effect in the territory of India shall, subject to any such adaptations and modifications as aforesaid, continue to have such extra-territorial effect. Explanation III – Nothing in this article shall be construed as continuing any temporary law in fore beyond the date fixed for its expiration or the date on which it would have expired if this Constitution had not come into force. Explanation IV - An Ordinance promulgated by the Governor of a province under section 88 of the Government of India Act, 1935, and in force immediately before the commencement of this Constitution shall, unless withdrawn by the Governor of the corresponding State earlier, cease to operate at the expiration of six weeks from the first meeting after such commencement of the Legislative Assembly of that State functioning under clause (1) of article 382, and nothing in this article shall be construed as continuing any such Ordinance in force beyond the said period. 6.1. The Article 372 of the Constitution in substance provides that all laws of the land which were in force before promulgation of the constitution of India shall continue to be in force till such time the same is altered or repealed by a competent legislature or other competent authority. No such step in terms of Article 372 has so far been taken by the legislature or any 10 competent authority to amend the Letters Patent and rename the High Court of Judicature at Patna. It is not, therefore, open to this court to take any step to rename this High Court. The petitioner‟s remedy lies elsewhere. The contention is rejected. 7. The second prayer advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the board indicating the names of the Chief Justices of this Court along with the length of their tenures put up on the walls outside the Chief Justices courts room should incorporate the names of the Acting Chief Justices also. He relies on various provisions of the Constitution including Article 223, which reads as follows:- 223. Appointment of acting Chief Justice – When the office of Chief Justice of a High Court is vacant or when any such Chief Justice is by reason of absence or otherwise, unable to perform the duties of his office, the duties of the office shall be performed by such one of the other Judges of the court as the President may appoint for the purpose. In his submission, the Acting Chief Justice is a distinct and recognized authority under the Constitution and, therefore, should be so recognized by the Patna High Court also. It appears to us that the 11 board put up outside the walls of the Chief Justices court room is not in discharge of constitutional, or statutory duties and functions. It is a mere display of the names of the permanent incumbents in the office of the Chief Justice of this court. Removal of the board will not in the least be violative of the provisions of the Constitution, or any Act of the Parliament or State Legislature, nor will it affect the functioning of the High Court. The list of Acting Chief Justices of this court is an administrative act, and is maintained by the Registry of this court. In view of the position that such a list of permanent Chief Justices displayed outside the walls of the court room of the Chief Justice is not in exercise of a constitutional or statutory duties and functions, the same need not be interfered with by a writ of mandamus. 9. In the result, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Rajeev/Praveen (S.K. Katriar, J.) ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)