The Decision in Khoday Distilleries and the Curious Case of SLP Dismissals

This paper begins by quantitatively characterising the burgeoning docket of the Supreme Court, the disproportionate contribution therein by SLPs, and espouses the view that this problem is a consequence of its conscious choices. It traces the expanding scope of Article 136 of the Constitution since independence and its philosophical underpinnings across decades to understand the present crisis. In doing so, the paper reflects upon the failure of the Supreme Court to frame appropriate guidelines to check the rising docket. It also reflects upon the two divergent strings of jurisprudence vis-à-vis maintainability of review petitions upon the dismissal of an SLP. This paper argues that while J. Sikri’s opinion in Khoday Distilleries lays down the procedurally accurate interpretation and resolves the specific conflict of maintainability of review petitions, it missed an opportunity to address the concern regarding indiscriminate filing of SLPs, lay appropriate guidelines vis- à-vis discretion under Article 136 or even balance procedural rights with judicial efficiency. The paper emphasizes on the need for the procedure established in Khoday Distilleries to be coupled with additional caveats. In pursuit of evaluating such caveats, this paper delves into some of the reforms suggested so far. Specifically, this paper argues that the proposed Court of Appeals would only exacerbate the existing docket crisis whereas regulating the discretion under Article 136 improves judicial efficiency and thereby better protects equity for the larger society and the SC’s effort at being a People’s Court.