JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. - This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

2. The Petitioners in WP(C)2018/2021 are practising lawyers who are all Senior citizens. The prayer in the petition is that the Subordinate Courts and Quasi-Judicial bodies in Delhi ought to be directed to hold hybrid hearings, once physical courts are opened, as there are several counsels who suffer from co-morbidities and are unable to appear before the Court due to the threat of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Petitioners also submit that adverse orders are being passed by the subordinate courts if the lawyers do not appear physically and therefore enormous prejudice is being caused. On 16th February 2021, a report was called for from the worthy Registrar General as to availability of infrastructure in the subordinate courts including availability of internet connectivity, both in the court premises and the residences of the judicial officers. A report has been submitted by the Registrar General. The report overall suggests that hybrid hearings are not fully possible in the district courts at this stage as there are several infrastructural issues.

3. In W.P.(C) 2673/2021, the Petition has been filed by a practising lawyer before this Court and the reliefs sought in the petition are two-fold:

(i) There should be a mechanism for vaccination of lawyers, who are enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi and who are members of the Delhi High Court Bar Association;

(ii) That until the vaccination process of all lawyers is completed, the impugned notification dated 20th February, 2021 relating to the physical functioning of the Delhi High Court and

Subordinate Courts ought to be suspended.

4. On 26th February 2021, this Court after hearing several counsels appearing for the Petitioner was of the opinion that the various submissions made praying for hybrid hearings ought to be considered by the DHCBA and its stand ought to be placed on record.

5. Today, at the outset Mr. Viraj R. Datar, ld. counsel appearing for the Delhi High Court, has pointed out order dated 3rd March, 2021, passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in suo moto proceedings titled Courts on its own Motion vs. Union of India, wherein a detailed order has been passed in respect of the vaccination of lawyers and judges etc. Pursuant to the said order, the said matter is stated to have been listed before the learned Division Bench-II today, and has been adjourned to 10th March, 2021 and certain directions have been issued.

6. Mr. Datar also submits that the administrative order which has been challenged before the court in the present petition is based on the minutes of a Full Court Resolution dated 19th February, 2021. Accordingly, he submits that this matter ought to be heard by a Division Bench, as per the Roster.

7. In terms of the relief prayed for in these two writ petitions, various submissions have been made today.

8. Mr. Nagarajan, ld. counsel appearing in WP(C) 2018/2021, submits that hybrid hearings ought to be the way forward. He relies upon the Rajya Sabha Standing Committee Report in support of his submissions.

9. Mr. Vikas Singh, ld. Senior Counsel, appearing for the Coordination Committee of all District Bar Associations, submits that in view of the fact that there are several technical glitches taking place during online hearings, they cannot be equated with physical courts. Moreover, he submits that every Court has a territory where lawyers can practice, and unless and until there is complete reciprocity of online hearings across the country, the Delhi High Court holding online hearings would be detrimental to local lawyers. He finally submits that herd immunity has been acquired in Delhi and since social gatherings have already been permitted as per the orders of the Disaster Management Authority, there is no reason whatsoever, why resumption of full physical courts should not take place.

10. Mr. Ramesh Gupta, ld. Senior Counsel and Chairman of the Bar Council of Delhi, su