What Fali Nariman would do if he were an advocate on record of Supreme Court? That is the question I asked myself.
An Individual is powerless against a mighty organisation or an institute.
The mighty organisations are bound to be cruel, merciless and sometimes totally unjust and unfair.
When we are at receiving end, we get fumed up. We feel lot of anger.
At this time we want to retaliate. We want shoot a paper arrow at institution.
It may be a letter. It may be an RTI application. A Complain letter. Or we get some other fighter-type-idea.
I have found that, such actions during any hurt-emotions, are usually shallow. They create more problems than solutions.
We feel blank, angry and more frustrated.
TRY THIS SUGGESTION
Here, we are accepting suggestion of our mind that injustice should not be tolerated. But then we are also asking our mind to probe further and come up with some better suggestion.
The mind becomes cool and starts searching for a better way.
This may not work for all of us. And this may not work all the time.
But the fact is, half an hour ago, I was fuming. I was angry.
I was angry over Supreme Court Registry. Sometimes I feel that objections in matters raised by Registry are idiotic objections.
For examples :-
1) In a case of Cr. P.C. 125, it objects that FIR is not filed. It takes normally two days to sort out this objection.
2) In case when accused is on bail, the Registry objects that Proof of surrender is not filed, nor application for exemption from surrendering is filed.
3) In complaint cases it asks for FIR, and Crime Register Number, even if there are no FIR in such cases.
4) The Registry says that all orders mentioned in High Court judgement, whether they are relevant or not, must be filed.
On the other hand, it asks advocate on record to put a certificate that only necessary and relevant material is filed.
Some times, High Court refers to some unreported judgement or order which is nowhere to find.. The Registry asks advocate on record to find this unreported judgement also.
5) Sometimes it asks to file some orders which are passed after judgement of High Court.
At the same time it asks Advocate on record to certify that nothing which was not on record of High Court is filed. Contradictions.
6) An advocate on record may feel that certain orders mentioned in High Court judgement are only history of previous rounds of litigations and are not necessary to be filed.
His view is overruled by Registey, and it is insisted that AOR should file all unnecessarily orders also.
7) The normal rule is, under Order 47 Rule 1 all requirements can be waived by Supreme Court. But no applications under Order 47 Rule 1 is allowed to waive office objections!
8) When opposite parties are very rich and cunning, sometimes advocate on records feel that lot of unnecessary objections are raised by Registry and sometimes matter gets frustrated and defeated in registry itself. And advocate on record finds that there is no place or ground to complain.
9) Sometimes, Advocates on Records of rich parties, engage retired employees of Supreme Court to work part time in their offices to guide them about removing office objections.
Their cases obviously move with less objections. But all advocates cannot afford this route.
10) At one point, it was decided that once an Advocate or Records says that he does not have any required order or exhibit, the objections were ignored and matters were heard in open court at risk of parties. But now such request letters are also rejected by Registry.
Things have come to such a state that it is easier to argue before judges than to argue before Registy.
I felt like complaining to someone about the situation. I fumed
without any visible reasons.
But then I asked my mind, there must be some better way of doing this.
I cooled down own my own.
So far my mind has not shown me any better way of solving this problem.
To change any organisation is very very difficult.
Whenever we complain about any organisation, we are bound to feel resistance from otherside.
The organisation will come up with reasons to justify its actions.
There is no way to persuade any organisation to change by complaining.
To be a complainant is also not good thing to be.
There is a saying, Complainants always travel by public transport. They are so busy with their complaining habits, that they miss many money making opportunities.
The complaining is not a good idea. There must be some better way of solving a problem.
I then thought, what Fali Nariman would do if he were an advocate on record of Supreme Court?
The answer my mind gave was :
“He will say , Oh ! Really !, and then he will dismiss the whole issue with a smile.”
I think his method must be the “Better way”.
If we keep looking for better ways, we are bound to find better ways.
A way is better if it makes you smile and feel better and when it makes no enemies. We make no enemies when we do not ask any one to change.