Today, in a sharp expression of displeasure, CJI B.R. Gavai rebuked the request made on behalf of the Attorney General for India, R. Venkataramani, to adjourn the ongoing hearing, remarking that repeated postponements were “very unfair to the Court.”
The Bench, led by CJI Gavai, was informed by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati that the Attorney General would be unable to appear owing to his engagement in an international arbitration. The request for adjournment, however, did not sit well with the Chief Justice. “We have accommodated him for so much time. We have accommodated him twice. This is not fair to the Court,” CJI Gavai remarked, adding pointedly, “If you want to keep it after (November) 24th, you tell us frankly.” The Chief Justice is set to retire on November 23.
The case stemmed from a constitutional challenge to the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, a legislation that has been contested for provisions governing the age and tenure of tribunal members, and for allegedly undermining judicial independence. Senior Advocate Arvind P. Datar, appearing for the petitioner, has urged the Court to strike down certain provisions as violative of the principles of separation of powers and judicial autonomy.
The matter has been before the Supreme Court for several months, with the Attorney General personally representing the Union. However, the recurring adjournments prompted the Chief Justice to question the fairness and practicality of the government’s approach to hearings of constitutional import.
Emphasizing the importance of continuity in part-heard cases, CJI Gavai observed, “Practice of the High Court is that if you are on your legs in a matter, the first preference is to the part-heard matter.” Reflecting on his own experience as a High Court judge, he added, “When we are in the High Court, whatever briefs we had, we had to give up for the part-heard.”
While expressing due regard for the Attorney General’s stature, the Chief Justice emphasized that institutional respect must not come at the cost of judicial efficiency. “We have the highest respect for the highest Constitutional lawyer. But if this is the manner in which hearings are shunted off… we have not kept any other matter tomorrow with a view that we finish the (Madras Bar Association) matter tomorrow and utilise Saturday and Sunday for the judgment,” he said.
The Bench also recalled that, on an earlier occasion, the Attorney General had sought to refer the matter to a larger Bench, prompting the Chief Justice to question whether the move was “a tactic to avoid the bench.” The Court expressed frustration that repeated last-minute requests were derailing the timeline for finalising the judgment. “When do we write the judgment then? This week also we cannot write the judgment. This is very unfair to the Court,” CJI Gavai said.
The Chief Justice also asked why another law officer could not appear in the AG’s stead, noting, “You have a battery of competent ASGs.” To this, ASG Bhati responded that the Attorney General had personally been handling the matter for the Union.
After a brief exchange, the Chief Justice agreed to accommodate the AG’s schedule, but with a firm caveat. “Let Mr. Datar make his submissions tomorrow. We will hear the learned AG on Monday. If he does not come, we will close the matter on Monday,” he said.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
