Decisions of the Supreme Court always have an air of finality to them. After all, it is the highest court of appeal in the land and judicially there is no next level so to speak. Yet, recently, litigants have shown marked inclination for review petitions. They assume that review petitions are a routine course of appeal and legal strategy. This is a trend that is best discouraged.
On Thursday, Essar Oil said it had filed a review petition against a judgement of the court, which held that the company was not eligible for a deferred payment of Rs6,300 crore in sales tax. Besides this, the income-tax department has filed a review petition in the Vodafone-Hutchison tax case. Various telecom companies are thinking along similar lines in the matter of the 2G licence cancellation verdict despite the rulings of the apex court being conclusive.
Other reports suggest that former Union telecom minister A. Raja is also planning to file a review in the same case on the grounds that the apex court has severely prejudiced his case before the special court conducting the trial in the 2G spectrum case. This is despite the apex court making it clear that no observations in the judgement will have bearing on any parallel legal proceedings.
A review petition is filed only when it appears that a fundamental error was committed by a court of appeal on the same set of facts in a case—no new facts are usually allowed in a review and it is not orally argued before a bench.
This tendency to announce the filing of reviews is unwarranted as it goes against the grain of the doctrine of finality, which is associated with judgements of a final court of appeal.
While so many reviews being filed within the same time frame might not be connected, they give rise to a worrying tendency of questioning the sanctity and competence of judges adjudicating cases. Such behaviour also raises doubts on the bona fides of reviews when it appears that the concerned court has given due consideration and time to what are surely important questions. A court of appeal painstakingly hears out final hearings, and rarely are such cases decided in haste. Litigants would do well not to take them lightly.
Are petitions seeking a review of the apex court’s judgements unwarranted? Tell us at views@livemint.com