Rajasthan High Court Advocates ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 9376 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13855/2021

Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan & Ors.

----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3693/2022 Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan & Ors.

                                                                ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Anil Bhandari
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Sandeep Shah, Sr. Advocate-cum-
                               AAG, assisted by Mr. Abhimanyu
                               Singh Rathore
                               Dr. Sachin Acharya, Sr. Advocate
                               assisted by Mr. Karan Parihar
                               Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, ASG
                               Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                    Order

19/07/2022

(In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13855/2021)

Pursuant to the direction given by this Court, learned AAG

Shri Sandeep Shah has placed on record, the district-wise break-

up of cases filed before the learned Rajasthan Civil Services

Appellate Tribunal, a careful perusal whereof indicates that as

many as 2655 cases filed before the Tribunal pertain to districts

(2 of 6) [CW-13855/2021]

which are failing under the domain and jurisdiction of the

Rajasthan High Court, Principal Seat Jodhpur.

On the previous date of hearing, an affidavit had been filed

by the Chairman of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal,

wherein, it was indicated that as on 30.04.2022, from the total

pendency figure of 7019 cases, 747 were pending before Jodhpur

Bench and 6272 were pending before Jodhpur Bench of Tribunal

and thus, an opinion was expressed that the State Government

did not think it expedient to establish a permanent bench of

Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal at Jodhpur.

Apparently, in view of the statistics which have been

provided now, the affidavit dated 25.05.2022 filed by the learned

Chairman appears to have drafted in a couched language and does

not convey the correct position regarding pendency with specific

area-wise distribution of the cases.

By order dated 08.12.2021, this Court had directed the

Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal to hold its sitting for at

least five days at Jodhpur Bench.

Learned AAG Shri Shah had drawn the Court's attention to

the order dated 19.01.2004 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court

in the case of State of Rajasthan & Anr. vs Sher Singh

Songara (Special Leave Petition No.8449/2003) and

thereupon, the order dated 08.12.2021 was modified on

08.04.2022 and the Tribunal was given liberty to hold sittings at

Jodhpur as per previous precedent.

(3 of 6) [CW-13855/2021]

On 18.05.2022, the petitioner's counsel filed an application

wherein it was asserted that the Tribunal was holding sittings in

Jodhpur only for three days a month i.e., Tuesday, Wednesday and

Thursday and whereas, remaining two days of the week i.e,

Monday and Friday were being consumed as travel days.

Apparently thus, there is merit in the contention of the

petitioner association that the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate

Tribunal is not functioning in the letter and spirit of the concept

"Nyay Aapke Dwar".

The total of pendency of cases from the districts falling under

the jurisdiction of Rajasthan High Court, Principal Seat Jodhpur is

2655 and those pertaining to districts under the Rajasthan High

Court, Bench Jaipur is 4364 and thus, holding sittings of the

Tribunal at Jodhpur Bench only for three days a month is

absolutely unacceptable.

The order in the case of Sher Singh Songara (supra) was

passed way back in the year 2004. Much water has flown since

then. Institution of cases has drastically increased. Serious efforts

are being made by the Government and the Judiciary to provide

speedy and affordable justice to the litigants. In this background,

the Tribunal's action in holding sittings at Jodhpur for a mere three

days a month is not only causing a great deal of inconvenience to

the litigants and lawyers but the same also violates the aim and

motto of concept of "justice at door steps".

(4 of 6) [CW-13855/2021]

Hon'ble the Supreme Court considered the aspect of setting

up of benches of Central Administrative Tribunal in the case of

S.P. Sampath Kumar & Ors. vs Union of India (UOI) & Ors.

reported in (1987) 1 SCC 124 and held as below:-

"8. I may also add that if the Administrative Tribunal is to be an equally effective and efficacious substitution for the High Court on the basis of which alone the impugned Act can be sustained, there must be a permanent or if there is not sufficient work, then a Circuit Bench of the Administrative Tribunal at every place where there is a seat of the High Court. I would, therefore, direct the Government to set up a permanent bench and if that is not feasible having regard to the volume of work, then at least a Circuit Bench of the Administrative Tribunal wherever there is a seat of the High Court, on or before 31st March, 1987. That would be necessary if the provisions of the impugned Act are to be sustained. So far as rest of the points dealt with in the judgment of Ranganath Misra, J. are concerned, I express my entire agreement with the view taken by him."

This very view was reiterated in the case of Rojer Mathew

vs South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2020) 6 SCC 1,

wherein it was held as below:-

"43. The committee which carries out the judicial impact assessment of the functioning of the tribunals has to deal with a whole lot of issues. It is neither feasible nor proper to lay down all the issues in this judgment but I am highlighting some of them. Another important issue which must be dealt with is whether the tribunals have really helped in early disposal of the cases. The time spent for disposal may vary from case to case but we are mainly dealing with the cases which end in the High Courts or at the Supreme Court. This must be done not only on an all India basis but also on State to State basis. There are many smaller States in the country where the Civil Courts and the High Courts are not overburdened with work. In these States, the cases are decided much faster than in many other larger States. Normally, it

(5 of 6) [CW-13855/2021]

is these smaller States which do not get permanent benches, sometimes not even Circuit Benches. It is a paradox that the States which are judicially well administered and where disposal is quick, do not get the permanent benches and the litigants suffer whereas States which are very slow in disposing of the cases get more benches. Even when Circuit Benches come to these States there is a huge time gap between two sittings. The whole purpose of providing cheaper and faster justice gets lost because the Circuit Benches come rarely and many times the constitution of the Circuit Benches changes on every visit resulting in matters being reheard every time.

44. Having tribunals without benches in at least the capitals of States and Union Territories amounts to denial of justice to citizens of those States and Union Territories. It also makes the justice delivery system very metropolis centric. This has many adverse effects. The bench and the bar in smaller district towns and capitals of smaller States which were handling these matters in a competent manner are deprived of handling these types of cases. This also makes access to justice expensive for the litigants. It also leads to a situation where the bench and the bar in these areas would not have any experience of handling matters relating to jurisdictions transferred to tribunals which they used to handle earlier. Therefore, the local bench and bar will never develop and the entire bulk of work will be captured by those practicing in Delhi or in those State capitals where benches of the tribunals are set up. Instead of taking justice to the common man, we are forcing the common man to spend more money, spend more time and travel long distances in his quest for justice, which is his fundamental right."

Therefore, it is considered imperative and essential in the

interest of justice to direct the State Government to forthwith

establish a permanent Bench of the Rajasthan Civil Services

(6 of 6) [CW-13855/2021]

Appellate Tribunal at Jodhpur and till such permanent Bench is

constituted, the sittings of the Tribunal at Jodhpur need to be

increased.

We therefore, direct the State Government to forthwith

initiate the process for establishing a permanent Bench of the

Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal at Jodhpur. The

Principal Secretary, Law Department shall take up the matter with

the concerned officials of the State Government and ensure that

entire procedure including setting up of the infrastructure and

providing human resources is completed at the earliest. A parallel

procedure shall be started for appointing additional Members so

that the Jodhpur Bench can start functioning at the earliest.

In the meantime as an interim measure and looking to the

district-wise ratio of cases mentioned supra, we hereby direct that

the Circuit Bench of Tribunal shall hold its sittings at Jodhpur for

eight effective days each month.

(In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3693/2022)

Learned counsel for the respondents pray for and are

granted time to file reply.

                                          List on 26.08.2022



                                   (KULDEEP MATHUR),J                                       (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
                                    129-Sudhir Asopa/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)