Skip to main content


(This speech was delivered on 7.10.2013 in the farewell function of Justice RS Sharma on his demitting the office on his appointment as President of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Raipur)

My brothers, members of the Bar and Registry, ladies and gentlemen,
Namaste, Jai Johar, and a very good afternoon to all of you.

We have assembled here to bid farewell to Brother R. S. Sharma who is demitting office as Judge of this Court to join his new assignment as President, Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur.

Brother Sharma was born on 25th November, 1951.  He joined the judicial service of the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in the year 1981.  He became a member of the Higher Judicial Service in 1994.  He was Registrar (Vigilance) in this High Court in the year 2007 and was Principal Secretary, Law Department, Raipur from March 2009 till his elevation as a Judge of this High Court on 10th May, 2011.

When I came here, I realised that the committees in the court were large and unwieldy.  It wasn't that they were not good but as they say, 'too many cooks spoil the broth': they were made smaller and tighter; so that they may meet more often and work more efficiently.

I rmade them smaller with the help of the senior judges; at that time one thing surprised me. I realised that one judge was in great demand and he was Brother  RS Sharma.  The reason was simple: he is competent, good and the best part is he has ability to put his point of view, without offending anyone: he has quality of getting along with the team; the fundamental quality in being in a team.

In a team, it is not the most brilliant man but the person, who can get along with the team; the one who can bind the team contributes the most. He not only has this quality but has sound knowledge of civil and criminal law. I can vouch for it for I sat with Brother Sharma and he is a hard working Judge. The present assignment is a recognition of his these qualities.

On behalf of my brother Judges and myself, I extend good wishes to Madam Sharma and Brother Sharma and wish him good luck in his new assignment.
Jai Hind


Popular posts from this blog


Two areas are close to my heart, namely uniform civil code and population control. I had drafted bills in late 1990's before I was  offered judgeship. The bills were distributed in the Parliament at that time but before they could be introduced (whether as a bill from the public or as a private member bill) the Parliament was dissolved. 
The Central government has asked the Law Commission to examine the issue of implementing the  Uniform Civil Code in detail and submit a report. I thought of publishing the bill relating to Uniform Civil Code that I had drafted.


Sometime ago, there were headlines in the newspaper 'Night Drama that did not succeed'. Here is the story of a night drama that succeeded. 
Kalyan Singh was the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and Romesh Bhandari was the Governor. He,  illegally dismissed the Kalyan Singh Government on 21st February, 1998.  A writ petition was filed the smae night and he was reinstated. This is the only time that the a deposed head of a State was pput back in saddle by the court. Here is the account of the same. 
The writ petition at the Allahabad High Court was filed by Dr. NKS Gaur, an MLA from Allahabad North and Minister of Higher Education in UP, but for the sake of convenience, the case is referred as 'the Kalyan-Singh case'.  
During my tenure as a judge, it has been matter of speculation/ complaint how I became Additional Advocate General and why was this case entrusted to me. This is explained in Appendix-I to this article. In order to complete the picture, Romesh Bhandari's …


Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees right to the life and liberty. Right to move to the court to enforce Article 21 was suspended under Article 359 of the Constitution during internal emergency (1975-77). Soon a question arose if, in such a situation, a writ of Habeas Corpus is maintainable? ADM Jabalpur Vs Shiv Kant Shukla AIR 1976 SC 1207 : (1976)2 scc 521: 1976 UJ (SC) 610: 1976 Cr LR (SC) 303: 1976 CrL J 1945 (SC) (the Habeas Corpus case) dealt with this question. This article, written 20 years after the aforesaid case was decided, narrates about the incidents, lawyers and judges connected with that case and what has happened to them.
‘The time has come’ The Walrus said ‘To talk of many things:
Of shoes and ships and sealing wax-
Of cabbages - and kings-
And why the sea is boiling hot-
And whether pigs have wings’ Through the Looking Glass; Lewis Carroll