One of the many things that lawyers practising at the supreme and high courts hate most about the filing process is curing defects in the paperbooks.

Sometimes the Supreme Court registry acts like a nursery teacher who can’t just ignore few mistakes but wants to you really learn them. You cure one defect, the registry will point out another one.

And if you are a junior lawyer, by default, it’s your fault.

While there appears to be no end to the registry’s messing around with my filings, the registry has now messed with the petition filed by former SC judge Justice Markandey Katju, pointing out a mistake in his name as a petitioner.

I mean how dare they! His Lordship has already warned not to mess with those from Allahabad and Katju’s many other comments brought him condemnation from both the houses of Parliament (who also obviously represent the 90% idiots of India).

You may also know that His Lordship has filed a Writ Petition asking the Supreme Court to quash those resolutions.

So if you are wondering that a petition filed on 29 June 2015 bearing Diary No 20089 of 2015 (also posted on his blog on the same day) has not been heard yet, then blame the registry.

From all that I can see from the SC website, there are eight defects in the petition, but the one which interests me is the sixth one, which states:

"Retd." has not been mentioned with petitioner's name in cause title of W.P.

Oh my Lord! The SC registry has paused His Lordship’s petition from moving ahead just because it says “Justice Markandey Katju” and not “Justice (Retd.) Markandey Katju”.

There ain’t no sweeter sound than that of justice and equality served by the registry!

Shakespeare, who is often quoted by His Lordship, famously said: “What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

I agree. When you no longer can deliver judgments, you are not Justice and of course never a Lord.

You are just like me and like that registry guy who marks defects in my paperbooks.

Ps: The petition, at para 6 and para A of Grounds, cites a few lines from the recent SC judgment in Devidas Tuljapurkar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors to substantiate the claims. The funny thing here is that the judgment relied upon is one which in Justice (Retd.) Katju’s opinion, and I quote, “shows the low intellectual level of some of those sitting in the Supreme Court”.

Pps: Though there have been several instanes of name-calling in Katju’s blog, Mahatma Gandhi has been respectfully referred as Gandhiji by Katju. So much respect does Justice (Retd.) Katju apparently have for hte family that at para F, even Maneka Gandhi is Maneka Gandhiji. Ctrl +F, Replace Gandhi with Gandhiji perhaps?

Advocate-off-Record is an advocate of the Supreme Court who prefers to have defective paperbooks anonymously