Justice Gangopadhyay vs justice Sen: Why Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance?

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud will hear the matter in a special sitting on January 27.

A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose will hear the matter related to a major controversy between the Calcutta high court's single-judge bench order and a division bench's decision.

Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay (right).

On Friday, the Supreme Court took suo moto cognisance of an order passed by the single bench of the Calcutta high court headed by justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay who had termed as "illegal and ignored" an order of the division bench of justices Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar in a case of alleged irregularities in the admission of MBBS candidates in state-run medical colleges and hospitals in West Bengal.

What is justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay vs justice Soumen Sen issue?

• Initially, the single bench of justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay had directed a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the alleged irregularities in the admission of MBBS candidates in medical colleges and hospitals in West Bengal saying it had no faith in the state police on a plea filed by MBBS candidate Itisha Soren.
• Later, the West Bengal government moved the division bench of the Calcutta high court. The division bench of justices Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar then stayed the single bench's order for the CBI probe into the matter.
• On Thursday, a single-judge bench of justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay held that the order passed by the division bench as wholly illegal and had to be ignored.
• Justice Gangopadhyay also took the matter and asked the advocate general how without the impugned order an order of stay could be passed by a division bench and how an order could be passed when there was no memo of appeal.
• Justice Gangopadhyay, in his order, has accused justice Sen, who is heading the division bench, of acting for a political party in the state, and therefore, the orders passed by the bench led by justice Sen are required to be relooked if the Supreme Court thinks so.
• "I have no other option but to ignore the order of the said Division Bench as the order has been passed in continuation of the illegal appeal void ab initio. I have ignored the said illegal order passed by the said Division Bench for the reasons as has been stated above including the ground of 'interested person' Hon'ble Justice Soumen Sen… "Thus, Justice Sen is acting clearly for some political party in this State and, therefore, the orders passed in the matters involving State, are required to be relooked if the Hon'ble Supreme Court thinks so," justice Gangopadhyay said.

(With inputs from agencies)