Gangasen V. G vs. The Secretary Health Department
AI Summary
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by Gangasen V.G., declining to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution against a Kerala High Court order. This decision effectively upholds the lower court's ruling, marking the end of the legal challenge at the apex court.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
Advocates on Record
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
The petitioner, Gangasen V.G., filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) in the Supreme Court of India, challenging a final judgment and order dated October 29, 2019, passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in OPKAT No. 1233/2013. The respondents included the Secretary, Health Department, and others. The petition also included an application for permission to file additional documents, which was disposed of with the main petition.
Timeline of Events
OPKAT No. 1233/2013, the originating case for the impugned order, was filed in the High Court of Kerala.
High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam passed the impugned final judgment and order in OPKAT No. 1233/2013.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) filed in the Supreme Court.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) registered in the Supreme Court.
Application for permission to file additional documents filed by the petitioner.
Supreme Court heard the Special Leave Petition and dismissed it.
Key Factual Findings
The Special Leave Petition does not present a suitable case for the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Questions of Law
Statutes Applied
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioner sought special leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of the High Court of Kerala, implying arguments that the High Court's decision was erroneous, legally unsustainable, or involved a question of public importance requiring Supreme Court intervention.
Respondent's Arguments
No arguments were recorded or presented by the respondent side, as the Special Leave Petition was dismissed at the admission stage by the Supreme Court itself.
Court's Reasoning
The Court explicitly stated, 'We are not inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.' This indicates that the Court, after considering the petition, found no compelling reason, exceptional circumstances, or substantial question of law warranting the exercise of its extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
- Emphasis on Judicial Discretion
- Adherence to Jurisdictional Limits
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.We are not inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
- 2.The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.
- 3.Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
The order is a summary dismissal at the admission stage, indicating the Court found no sufficient ground to entertain the petition, rather than laying down any substantive law or providing detailed reasoning on the merits of the case. Thus, it does not create a binding precedent.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
FRESH
Before:
Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
28 Feb 2020
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.4468/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-10-2019 in OPKAT No. 1233/2013 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam)
GANGASEN V.G. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents)
Date : 28-02-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Mohammed Sadique T.A., AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
We are not inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(Chetan Kumar) (Saroj Kumari Gaur) A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master