<p>The Supreme Court has called for a response from its Registry officials for "mistake" and "ignoring established practice and procedure" in listing a writ petition filed by eminent journalists N Ram and Arun Shourie and advocate Prashant Bhushan, before a separate bench than the one led by Arun Mishra. </p>.<p>Ram and others have challenged the validity of Contempt of Court Act, for stifling free speech. </p>.<p>Calling the move as "yet another mistake", the Supreme Court sources claimed as per practice and procedure in use, the matter should have been placed before a bench which has been seized with a similar matter. </p>.<p>It was a three-judge bench led by Justice Mishra which had on July 22 issued a notice for Suo Motu criminal contempt proceedings to Bhushan for his two tweets made on June 27 and 29 on the role of four former CJIs in "destruction of democracy" and current CJI riding on a high-end bike and shutting down the Supreme Court. This particular bench had already reserved the judgement in the contempt case.</p>.<p>On Saturday, the sources said the writ petition by Ram and others has been listed before a bench led by Justice D Y Chandrachud "ignoring established practice and procedure". In this regard, explanations of concerned officials have been called, they added.</p>.<p>According to the Supreme Court's website, the writ petition by Ram and others filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal and listed before of Justices Chandrachud and K M Joseph has now been deleted. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court has called for a response from its Registry officials for "mistake" and "ignoring established practice and procedure" in listing a writ petition filed by eminent journalists N Ram and Arun Shourie and advocate Prashant Bhushan, before a separate bench than the one led by Arun Mishra. </p>.<p>Ram and others have challenged the validity of Contempt of Court Act, for stifling free speech. </p>.<p>Calling the move as "yet another mistake", the Supreme Court sources claimed as per practice and procedure in use, the matter should have been placed before a bench which has been seized with a similar matter. </p>.<p>It was a three-judge bench led by Justice Mishra which had on July 22 issued a notice for Suo Motu criminal contempt proceedings to Bhushan for his two tweets made on June 27 and 29 on the role of four former CJIs in "destruction of democracy" and current CJI riding on a high-end bike and shutting down the Supreme Court. This particular bench had already reserved the judgement in the contempt case.</p>.<p>On Saturday, the sources said the writ petition by Ram and others has been listed before a bench led by Justice D Y Chandrachud "ignoring established practice and procedure". In this regard, explanations of concerned officials have been called, they added.</p>.<p>According to the Supreme Court's website, the writ petition by Ram and others filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal and listed before of Justices Chandrachud and K M Joseph has now been deleted. </p>
