Gujarat High Court Chief Justice asserts that while the Chief Justice holds the authority as the Master of Roster, they cannot transfer cases once assigned to a bench.
Gujarat: Recently, Gujarat High Court Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal raised concerns about the practice of transferring part-heard cases from one bench to another.
The Chief Justice stated that she would discuss the issue with the Full Court to find a permanent solution.
Chief Justice Agarwal expressed her dissatisfaction with the practice of transferring part-heard cases from one bench to another in the Gujarat High Court. She clarified that the Chief Justice’s authority over the roster is limited to the process of finalizing it and allocating cases. Once the roster is decided, the Chief Justice cannot unilaterally pull out a case from one bench and assign it to another.
“Yes, the Chief Justice is the master of the roster but only till the time the roster is decided. Once the roster is decided then things go out of the hands of the Chief Justice. Then Roster is to be given priority. Otherwise, what will happen is once Chief Justice decides roster, she will pull out a matter from one bench and give it to other bench. That isn’t possible,” Chief Justice Agarwal
Chief Justice Agarwal emphasized that the Chief Justice’s authority to transfer cases between benches is subject to providing valid reasons for the transfer.
The senior advocate argued that this has been a practice since the 1960s. However, the Chief Justice disagreed and stated that she would put an end to the practice after discussing the matter with the Full Court. She asserted that the Chief Justice should not have the power to transfer part-heard matters once the roster is finalized.
READ ALSO: GUJARAT HC REFUSES TO STAY DEFAMATION CASE
Chief Justice Agarwal expressed her intent to address the practice of transferring part-heard matters between benches by consulting with the Full Court. She emphasized her reservations, stating that once the roster is established, the Chief Justice should not have the authority to reallocate cases arbitrarily. She highlighted the importance of maintaining consistency and indicated her intention to find a permanent solution to this issue through discussions with the Full Court.
Chief Justice Agarwal clarified
If a matter is pending before a particular bench, any requests for transfer should be made to that specific bench. She emphasized that there must be a judicial order for a part-heard matter to be placed before a different bench. The Chief Justice stated that the Chief Justice’s administrative powers do not extend to transferring cases and that all judges, including the Chief Justice, are bound by judicial orders.
“I will discuss with the Full Court and decide this issue. I have my reservation about it. According to me Chief Justice is denuded of power to take away one matter from one roster and give it to other bench, once roster is decided. Otherwise, I being the Chief Justice can take matters from any bench and decide myself. But that is wrong. Thus, I have my reservations on this very issue. I will speak to the Full Court and find out a permanent solution to this issue,” she said.
Chief Justice Agarwal asserted that any contrary practice of reallocating matters between benches is erroneous. She emphasized the importance of adhering to established rules, stating that neither the Chief Justice nor any other authority has administrative power to transfer a matter once it’s before a specific bench without a judicial order. She highlighted the principle that only the bench currently hearing the matter has the authority to make such decisions.
READ ALSO: Gujarat High Court Rejects PIL Of Daman Liquor Merchants Association
