BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusMUMBAI SHRAMIK SANGHA AND ORS .
- Citation
- 2001 INSC 224
- Decided
- 25 April 2001
- Disposal
- Hearing Adjourned
Holding
A Constitution Bench decision binds a bench of two judges, and judicial discipline obliges the latter to follow it.
Summary
In Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Mumbai Shramik Sangha (2001), a civil appeal arose from a Bombay High Court order concerning the scope of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. Two learned judges of the Supreme Court expressed doubt about the correctness of the Constitution Bench's interpretation in Gammon (India) Ltd. v. Union of India. The issue before the Court was whether a bench of two judges could depart from a Constitution Bench decision they considered erroneous. The Court held that a Constitution Bench decision binds a bench of two judges and that judicial discipline requires adherence to it, even if doubts exist. At most, the smaller bench could have referred the matter to a larger bench, but it must follow the precedent. Consequently, the matter was ordered to be heard and decided by a bench of two judges, and the appeal remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether a bench of two Supreme Court judges is bound by a prior Constitution Bench decision that they doubt is correct
- Whether the scope of Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, as interpreted in Gammon (India) Ltd. v. Union of India, can be revisited by a smaller bench
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
A BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.
v.
MUMBAI SHRAMIK
.... SANGHA AND ORS .
APRIL 25, 2001
B [S.P. BHARUCHA, V.N. KHARE, N. SANTOSH HEGDE, Y.K.
SABHARWAL AND SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.]
Judicial discipline-Judgment given by a Constitution Bench*-Bench
of two Judges doubted the correctness of judgment ·of Constitution Bench- <.
C Consequential reference-Held-Decision· of Constitution Bench binds a
Bench of two Judges-Judicial discipline obliges them to follow it-
Accordingly matter should be heard and decided by a Bench of two Judges.
*Gammon (India) Ltd. v. Union of India, [1974] 3 SCR 665, referred
D to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6213 of
1997.
From the Judgment and Order dated 30/31.1.97 and 21.2.97 of the Bombay
E High Court in W.P. No. 436of1991.
T.R. Andharujina, P.N. Misra, P.H. Parekh, Sameer Parekh, Birender
Saraf, Ms. Indoo P. Verma, Colin Gonsalves, Bharat Sangal, Ms. Aparna Bhat,
Ms. Asha Pathak, Biswajit S., C.K. Ganguli, Brij Bhushan, K.C. Kaushik and
C. Radhakrishna for Arvind Kr. Sharma for the appearing parties.
F The following Order of the Court was delivered :
ORDER
The order of reference to a Constitution Bench is dated 13th January,
G 1998. Two learned judges of this Court have doubted the correctness of the
scope attributed to Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and
Abolition) Act, 1970 in the Constitution Bench judgment in Gammon (India)
Ltd. v. Union ofIndia, [1974] 3 SCR 665. This is how the matter comes before
us.
We are of the view that a decision of a Constitution Bench of this Court
H 208
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD. v. MUMBAI SHRAMIK SANGHA 209
binds a bench of two learned judges of this Court and that judicial discipline A
obliges them to follow it, regardless of their doubts about its correctness. At
the most, they could have ordered that the matter be heard by a Bench of
three learned judges.
Accordingly, this matter shall now be heard and decided by a Bench of
two learned judges. B
T.N.A. Matter is still pending.
-
e
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.