India News | Section of Cal HC Lawyers Stay Away from Acting CJ's Court

Kolkata, Jul 27 (PTI) A section of lawyers on Tuesday did not attend the court of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal over issues of assignment of matters and alleged lacunae in logistics at the Calcutta High Court for virtual hearing of cases.

The protest was not taken up by any of the three associations representing the advocates - the Calcutta High Court Bar Library Club, Calcutta High Court Bar Association and the Incorporated Law Society.

The lawyers who did not participate in judicial proceedings in the court of Acting Chief Justice Bindal alleged "violation of appellate side rules by the administrative decision of the Acting Chief Justice" and "shortcomings" in the logistics for virtual hearing of matters.

"I did not attend the court of the Acting Chief Justice from 2 pm today," said senior advocate Arunabha Ghosh, one of the lawyers who decided not to attend the court of the ACJ.

A section of lawyers had in a representation to the ACJ on July 22, referred to the assignment of a matter from the single bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya to a division bench.

Justice Bhattacharyya had on July 19 released a matter in which he had passed caustic observations in an order over connectivity issues during virtual hearing of cases, while expressing reservations about the way it was assigned to a division bench by the Acting Chief Justice, who is the “master of roster”, from his court.

Disturbed with connectivity issues during hearings in the virtual mode, Justice Bhattacharyya had on July 16 directed the high court's central project coordinator to show cause in writing as to why proceedings should not be drawn up against the High Court Administration, including the Registrar General and the Central Project Coordinator, in particular, for criminal contempt of Court due to continuous interference in virtual hearings in court owing to connectivity issues.

The reply to the show cause notice was filed on the same day, as directed.

Following the assignment of the matter to a division bench, Justice Bhattacharyya said in an order on July 19 that at no point of time, he was ever contacted by the Registrar General or the "Acting Chief Justice through His Lordship's Secretary or O.S.D. (Officer on Special Duty) seeking either my consent or at least having the courtesy to inform me about such assignment," which he said negates his judicial order in administrative capacity.

"I have serious doubts about the transparency of the system of dispensation of justice in our court in view of the above chain of events," Justice Bhattacharyya said in the order.

He said that the power of assignment springing from the "Master of Roster" concept, "confines the Chief Justice's administrative power to assign specific Benches for taking up specific types of matters, which cannot be exercised at the whims of the RG (registrar general) or even the Acting Chief Justice."

The high court administration has filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court challenging the order of Justice Bhattacharyya.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)