©
Petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY © - ‘UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. BTC. [AMARENDRA NAiH SEN AND D.A. Desat, JJ.] «
April 17, 1984 a
‘Constitution ‘of India Art. 1Duty of all courts to’ follow decision "of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Rules—Whether Supreme Court cati entertain writ petition against its own order and Judgment.
ORIGINAL & CRIMINAL APPELLATE “JunspICTION Writ
Petition (Cri) No. 708 of 1934. “(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
‘ And os Special Leave Petition (CrJ) Nos. 1949-50 of 1984
(From thé Judgment and Order dated 13.3. 84 and 16.3.84 of -— ‘the Bombay High Court in Special ‘Case Nos. 24/82 & 3/83).
Murli Bhandare, Govinddas, Ms. Bina Gupte, H.R. Bhardwaj and PP. Singh for the petitioner.
Ram Jethmalani, Ashok Desai and Ms. Rani Jethmatani for the respondents. —
' The Order ‘of the Court was delivered by
AMARENDRA NATH Sgn, J. There - is 10 merit in this ‘Writ
_ In my view, the writ petition challenging the validity of the . onder and judgment passed by this Court ‘as nullity or otherwise incorrect cannot be entertained. ‘I wish to take it clear that the — “dismissal of this writ petition will not prejudice the right of the petitioner, to approach.the Court with an appropriate review petition or to file any other application which he may be entitled in law to. file.
AR, ANTULAY ¥. UNION (Desai, J.) - 483
Desal, J. I broadly agree with the. conclusion recorded by my brother. . ; .
The learned Judge i in deciding the 8. L.P (Cr) Nos. 1149-50/ 1984 has followed the decision of this Court. The learned Judge
"was perfectly justified and indeed it was the duty of the learned
Judge to follow the decision of this Court which is binding on him.” , ee
Special leave petitions are dismissed.
HSK. ° - Petitions dismissed.