SC slams Haryana government for filing frivolous appeal

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday slammed the Haryana government for filing a "frivolous" appeal in a case involving financial benefits to a peon, in which it lost two rounds of legal battle in lower courts, saying "why public money and time of court is being wasted" through the exercise.

Seeing the apex court's anger, Haryana's Additional Advocate General Manjeet Singh said the state was withdrawing the SLP and assured it that in future such type of incidents will not take place.

The Law Secretary of the state government bore the brunt of the apex court's anger for filing a Special Leave Petition against the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had passed a verdict in favour of the peon of an aided institution.

"What is the question of law involved in the petition?" a Bench comprising Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said while dealing with the case which was decided purely on merits.

"What is the policy of Haryana government in filing SLPs and writ petitions?" the Bench said while terming as "frivolous" its petition challenging the High Court decision.

"Why public money is wasted in filing this type of petition? Why the time of the court is wasted?" the Bench said.

The Bench was angry that the decision to file the SLP was taken by the Law Secretary R C Bansal.

"You are a member of the superior judicial service. What is your duty?" the Bench told the Law Secretary who said the SLP was filed after eliciting the opinion of the Advocate General.

"Are you under the Advocate General or independent?" the Bench shot back and questioned him why he filed the SLP without looking into the matter.

"What is the role of the Law Secretary?" the Bench said and reminded him about the National Litigation Policy.

The Bench was pacified by the Additional Advocate General Manjeet Singh, who said the state was withdrawing the SLP and assured it that in future such type of incidents will not take place.

"We will not file such type of matter in future," he said.

The SLP was filed in connection with a case in which the state government had decided that the period of service rendered by the peon in another institution would not be considered for financial benefits for his joining the second aided institution.