Observing that they are no strangers to repeated adjournments sought by the Union Government, which is by far the largest litigant, the Bombay High Court quipped at the Center’s lament regarding pendency of cases, mounting arrears, frequent adjournments and impediments allegedly caused by our Courts to what the Government calls “the ease of doing business”.
“We are equally mindful, and we are constrained to say this, that we are no strangers to repeated assertions from the Union Government itself regarding pendency of cases, mounting arrears, frequent adjournments and impediments allegedly caused by our Courts to what the Government calls ‘the ease of doing business’,” said a division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Kamal Khata On October 5.
“Govt most often seeks adjournments, frequently needlessly”
The bench further added: “Conveniently overlooked in all these assertions is the fact that it is the Government that is by far the largest litigant, and it is the Government that most often seeks adjournments, frequently needlessly. This case is an example.”
The HC was hearing a petition filed by one Ramkali Gupta in 2016 over property-related issues.
In its order, the bench said it was “shocked” to note that Gupta's petition has been pending for seven years and that since June this year, the plea has been adjourned at the request of the Union government so that the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) could appear.
Expressing displeasure over repeated adjournments, the HC remarked that it does not expect ASG to appear in all the matters. “The conduct of the Union government in the present matter does not leave much to be desired. It leaves everything to be desired,” the bench said.
“Don't expect ASG to appear in every matter”: Court
The judges also said they do not expect the ASG to appear in every single matter involving the Union of India. “Obviously, it is not unreasonable to expect that there will be perfectly competent advocates from his office who will be able to lighten his load and assist him in discharging the duties of his office. We see no reason why no one else is prepared to go on with this matter,” it added.
The court said the issue raised in the petition was narrow and deserved to be heard and disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself. “Given this, we are entirely unable to appreciate, and indeed we express our strongest displeasure of applications for repeated adjournments,” the court said.
The bench, while adjourning the plea for the last time, said it was doing so only out of courtesy to the additional solicitor general.
The HC has kept the matter for hearing on October 23.
With regard to Gupta’s matter, the HC noted, “There is no great issue of law involved”. The question is only whether the record indicates that the Petitioner’s plot is or is not within a proscribed distance. More accurately, the question is from what starting point that distance is to be measured.
