The PIL filed was seeking removal of Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal and was filed by an advocate.
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a "frivolous" PIL seeking removal of Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal and imposed a cost of Rs1 lakh on an advocate for filing the "misconceived" and "misleading" petition leading to the "wastage of court's precious time".
A bench of justices HL Dattu and AK Dave took strong exception that advocate Ashok Pande, a native of Uttar Pradesh, "misused" the public interest litigation (PIL) for which an exemplary cost must be imposed.
At the very beginning of the hearing, the bench made it clear to the advocate that the petition was "frivolous" and it would impose heavy cost if he goes ahead with the arguments.
Testing the patience of the bench, Pande went ahead with his arguments for an one hour during which he raised all sorts of issue including appointing a Constitution bench for his matter.
The matter, which was listed for mentioning, was heard for more than one hour by the bench which is normally not allowed.
At the end of his arguments, the bench dismissed his petition seeking direction to the President to recall the Gujarat governor and imposed a cost of Rs1 lakh.
The bench said Pande will have to deposit the cost to the Gujarat Legal Services Authority within a week failing which recovery process would be initiated.
The petitioner, however, made submissions even after the order was dictated and then sought apology with folded hands.
Not sympathising with his gesture, the bench told him that it had warned him at the beginning of the hearing and called the security to take him away as he continued with his arguments.
The lawyer was taken out of court room forcibly by a security guard.
He had approached the apex court challenging Gujarat High Court order dismissing his PIL for recall of the governor and slapped him with a penalty of Rs25,000 for frivolous litigation.
He had sought removal of the governor after Chief Minister Narendra Modi allegedly wrote a letter to the Prime Minister to recall her for appointing Justice RA Mehta as Lokayukta without his consent.
Pande had sought recall of the governor on the ground that her appointment itself was void ab initio because the Centre had not taken Modi's consent before making her the governor.
The bench even told him that it was difficult to make it out whether he was seeking recall of the governor or questioning the way she was appointed.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}