The Court, on Thursday, discussed several judgments of the Supreme Court to end the controversy sought to be projected in the plea. It was emphasised that the Chief Justice was the master of roster, and was the authority on distribution of judicial workload.
Therefore, it was found that the petitioner’s apprehension was not only misplaced but misconceived.
It was noted by the bench that such misadventures must be dealt with sternly. The Court further said that the practice of arguing a matter at considerable length and then seeking the court’s leave to withdraw was a trick which could not be countenanced. Therefore, exemplary costs of ₹1 lakh were imposed.
The petitioner attempted to apologise to the court multiple times, however, the Court remained steadfast in its stand.