Calcutta High Court Upholds Chief Justice's Roster Authority, Dismisses Recall Application
Division Bench Decision Affirms Chief Justice's Jurisdictional Powers in Bench Assignment, Ends Protracted Legal Dispute
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed the authority of the Chief Justice as the master of the roster, dismissing a recall application that challenged the jurisdiction of a Division Bench presided over by the Chief Justice. The judgment, delivered on September 22, 2025, by Justices Madhuresh Prasad and Supratim Bhattacharya, effectively ends a prolonged legal battle involving mandamus appeals and the recall of previous court orders.
The case, Mr. Rathendra Raman, Chairman v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Ltd, revolved around the jurisdictional authority of a Division Bench to hear a mandamus appeal. The applicant, Hindustan Steelworks Construction Ltd., had argued that the Division Bench presided by the Chief Justice lacked the jurisdiction to hear the appeal due to the absence of a specific assignment order.
The Division Bench, however, firmly rejected this contention, citing the daily cause list dated January 2, 2024, which explicitly authorized the Chief Justice to allocate matters irrespective of their classification. The court emphasized that the Chief Justice's power to set the roster is constitutionally recognized and affirmed by previous judicial decisions, including those by the Supreme Court.
Justice Prasad noted, "The Chief Justice, being the master of the roster, is vested with the power and authority to set the jurisdiction of benches and allocate judicial business. The daily cause list assigning the Division Bench to hear any matter is valid."
The judgment further criticized the recall application as an attempt to revive issues that had been conclusively resolved through judgments by various benches and even the Supreme Court. The court deemed the application a desperate measure lacking legal and factual basis.
In the broader context, the case traces back to a dispute over lease rights for weighbridges within the port area, which had seen multiple rounds of litigation, including eviction orders and appeals. The High Court's decision marks the end of this legal saga, reaffirming established principles of judicial administration.
The judgment is a pivotal affirmation of the Chief Justice's role in managing court proceedings, ensuring efficient judicial administration, and upholding the integrity of the legal process.
Bottom Line:
A Division Bench presided by the Chief Justice can hear matters irrespective of classification if the daily cause list assigns such jurisdiction.
Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Sections 108(2) of the Government of India Act 1915, Contempt of Court Act
