The Rajasthan HC opposed scheduling more than 1,600 cases for a single day, with the judge expressing explicit disapproval of the excessive workload.
Justice Arun Monga, presiding over the single-judge bench, at the Rajasthan High Court strongly objected to the scheduling of over 1,600 cases for a single day.The judge expressed clear disapproval of the overwhelming workload.
The exceptionally high number of cases, exceeding 1,600, was mainly due to the transfer of cases from another bench that wasn’t sitting that day.Among the cases, Mitthan Lal Samariya vs State of Rajasthan stood out as particularly noteworthy.
Read Also:Rajasthan HC Orders To Reconsider Parole Plea Of Asaram
To prevent similar situations in the future, Justice Monga suggested that proactive measures should be implemented.
The bench at Jodhpur directed the Registry;
“Henceforth, when cases from another Bench are listed before a substitute Bench, the two cause lists must be distinctly delineated. The two cause lists shall not be merged.”
Justice Monga further suggested a solution to this inconvenience by proposing the segregation of the list into Cause List (I) and Cause List (II), with a clear indication in each list specifying whether it belongs to the routine list of the substitute Bench or the additional cause list of the Bench not in session. Alternatively, the court clarified that the two types of cases could also be labeled as Cause List (A) and (B).
Read Also:Asaram in Jail | Rajasthan HC Denies Request for Treatment at Pune Medical Center
Furthermore, Justice Monga suggested that the registry could also include the substitute courtroom number and the name of the judge on the second cause list, which is the additional cause list of the bench not holding court.
In some instances, it observed that certain counsels anxiously requested the court to prioritize their cases by mentioning them. The court acknowledged that such a rush, amid handling 1609 cases, significantly occupied the court’s time before it could resume regular court proceedings.
Upon expressing concerns about the situation, the Registrar (Judicial) explained that it’s customary to publish a common cause list when cases listed before a substitute bench due to the absence of another bench. However, the court, unsatisfied with this explanation, criticized the Registrar’s position, highlighting that the mixing of cases without distinct markers led to a confusing situation resembling a ‘perplexing maze’.
Read Also:Rajasthan HC Extends Stay for Baba Ramdev Amid Anti-Muslim Remarks
The court expressed its disappointment, amused by the length of the list, stating,
“What baffles common sense is how the Registry anticipates this Bench to navigate through this labyrinthine situation, akin to unscrambling a scrambled egg.”
Describing the situation as ‘chaotic’ due to the Registry’s actions, the court stressed that if the entire list were to be addressed within the allocated 5-hour court session, each case would only receive about 10 seconds. This timeframe deemed impractical as the court is also expected to hear cases and dictate daily orders/proceedings.
In a case where no respondents appeared, the court noted their uncertainty about which case would be addressed after mentioning, given the lengthy cause list.
The matter adjourned to April 18, 2024, with the option for further rejoinder if necessary, categorized as ‘Fresh Matters’ due to its urgency.
Advocate Tanwar Singh Rathore represented the petitioner.