Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Virender Kumar Singh - Appellant
Versus
Akhtar Ali - Respondent
CM(M) 676 of 2022 & CM No. 31088 of 2022
Decided On : 18-07-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemption from rules granted. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. article 227 invoked for expedited proceedings. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's limitations on issuing time-bound directions. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. matter to be prioritized by arc without further directions. (Para 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT
CM No.31085/2022 (exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 675/2022 & CM No.31084/2022 (stay)
3. This is yet another petition in which Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been invoked to secure a direction to the Court in seisin of the matter, to dispose of the proceedings within a particular time frame.
4. I have repeatedly observed that it is not possible for this Court to issue such directions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Courts are required to prioritise the work before them. It is not known as to how many matters, of greater vintage or greater urgency than that of the petitioner, are presently pending before the learned Trial Court.
5. Besides, for over two years, working of Trial Courts was badly affected owing to the COVID-19 pandemic and, even now, complete normalcy is yet to be restored. In such unenviable circumstances Courts, at every level, are straining every sinew in order to ensure that justice is dispensed as expeditiously and as effectively as possible. This court unhesitatingly commends the efforts made by Courts lower in the judicial hierarchy, towards this end. The Court is loathed to increase the burden on them by issuing any such peremptory directions as is sought in this petition.
6. Accordingly, this Court is not willing to fix any time bound schedule for disposal of this petition. The petition is accordingly disposed of by merely directing the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) before which the petitioner's matter is pending to deal with the matter in accordance with its due priority and keeping in mind the quantum of work pending before the Court. This Court is sanguine that the learned ARC would accord to the matter its due urgency, keeping in mind the above considerations.
7. No further directions can be issued in this matter, which is accordingly disposed of.
Article 227 prohibits mandating time-bound directions to lower courts, which must prioritize cases based on urgency.
Judicial efficiency is paramount; the High Court emphasized the need to expedite long-pending applications while acknowledging pandemic-related challenges.
Constitutional courts should not issue time-bound directions for case disposal in subordinate courts unless there are exceptional and compelling circumstances, as this interferes with the trial court....
Constitutional courts should not issue time-bound disposal directions to trial courts unless compelling or exceptional circumstances exist, as docket management and prioritization should remain withi....
Constitutional courts should not issue orders for time-bound disposal of cases pending in lower courts except in exceptional, extraordinary circumstances, leaving case scheduling priorities to the di....
Constitutional courts should refrain from setting time-bound schedules for trial court case disposal unless extraordinary circumstances exist, deferring to trial judges to manage their own dockets ba....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
