Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

DELHI JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION (REGD.)versusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND ORS.

Citation
1997 INSC 527
Decided
7 July 1997
Disposal
Disposed off

Holding

The Supreme Court ordered that the identified vacant rooms, except the one retained by the Revenue Department, be handed over to the Registrar of the High Court for setting up additional courts, with a detailed timeline for estimates, sanction, and completion.

Summary

The Delhi Judicial Service Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging a shortage of accommodation in the Tis Hazari Courts. The Supreme Court constituted a three‑advocate committee to inspect the premises and report on vacant rooms. The committee identified several vacant rooms, directing that all except one (used by the Revenue Department) be handed over to the Registrar of the Delhi High Court. The Court ordered the District Judge to submit a cost estimate for setting up courts in those rooms within four weeks, after which the Chief Justice would seek governmental sanction, and the CPWD would complete the work within two months. The petition was disposed of following these directions.

Issues considered

  • Whether the Supreme Court can direct the handover of vacant rooms in a district court to the High Court for establishing additional courts.
  • Whether the shortage of court accommodation justifies judicial intervention under Article 32 of the Constitution.

Legislation cited

Subjects

court accommodationwrit petitionArticle 32Supreme CourtHigh Courtadministrative orderCPWDTis Hazari Courtsjudicial service association

Judgment

A          DELHI JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION (REGD.)
                                        v.
       UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND ORS.

                                  JULY 7, 1997

B                [K. RAMASWAMY AND D:P. WADHWA, JJ.]

          Courts-Tis Hazari Courts-Shortage of accommodation-Writ petition
  filed in Supreme Court-Committee of three Advocates constituted-Their
  report that certain rooms are vacant-One room used by Revenue Depart-
C ment-Allowed to be retained by the Revenue Department-Other vacant
  rooms to be handed over to the Registrar of High Court within six weeks-Dis-
  trict Judge to submit report to High Court on the amount required for setting
   up Courts in the rooms-o4.dministrative Committee of Judges requested to
  finalise the estimate-chief Justice of Delhi High Court requested to send the
  estimate to Government and Government to give sanction-cPWD to com-
D plete the work of repairs etc.-Time-limit fzxed stage-wise.
           CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (C) No. 741 of
    1989

           Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
E
          P.P. Rao, T.C. Sharma, Ajay Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Sunil Mal-
    hotra and Mr. J.K. Das for the petitioner.

         Arnn Jaitley, A.S. Nambiar, A. Subhashini, Ashok Bhan, D.S. Mehra,
    D.N. Goburdhan, A.K. Srivastava, V.K. Verma, Vivek Sharma, Nanita
F   Sharma, V.B. Saharaya, Raj Panjwani and Mr. Vijay Panjwani for the
    Respondents.

           The following Order of the Court was delivered:

           By our Order dated May 5, 1997, we ordered constitution of a
G Committee of three advocates, namely, S/Shri P.P. Rao, Harish Salve and
  Arnn Jaitley, learned senior counsel of this Court. The Committee was
  requested to visit the Tis Hazari Courts and to submit a report on the
  vacant rooms for being handed over, if directed by this Court, to the High
  Court for establishing the Courts. Pursuant to the above direction, the
H members of the Committee visited the premises on 8th May, 1997 (instead
                                    470
             DELHI JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION v. U.0.1.                  471

  of 4th July, 1997, i.e., the date given for inspection) .and have given the A
  report. The report indicates that Room Nos. 346, 347, 354-A, 354-B, 359,
  156, 145, 361, 361-B, 361-C, 361-D, rooms adjacent to Room Nos. 361,
  274-A and 274-B are vacant. Though their report also indicates that Room
  No. 348 is vacant, in view of the assertion made by Mr. D.N. Goburdhan
  that this room is being used by the Tehsildar, we direct that Room No. 348 B
 ·may be retained by the Revenue Department and rest of the rooms be
  handed over to the Registrar of the High Court within six weeks from
  today. On so being handed over, the District Judge of the Tis Hazari
  Courts should submit a reporJ ,to the High Court on amount required for
  setting up the courts in the above rooms within four weeks from the date
  of taking the possession. The Registrar of the High Court is directed to C
  place the matter before the Administrative Committee dealing with it. The
  learned Judges dealing with it are requested to finalise the estimate and
  then the learned Chief Justice is requested to submit it to the Government
  for appropriate administrative and financial sanction. The NCT is directed
  to give the requisite sanction within four weeks from the date of the receipt D
  of the report. Thereafter, the Registrar is directed to hand it over to the
  CPWD for establishing the courts in the above rooms, which would have
  them complete within two months thereafter.

        The Writ Petition is accordingly ordered.
                                                                                  E
        Ms. A. Subhashini, learned counsel appearing for the High Court is
  directed to serve the notice by dasti to Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, learned
  counsel who is appearing for the Railway Administration for obtaining the
· necessary instructions. List the matter after two weeks in this behalf before
  a Bench of which Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa is a member.
                                                                                  F
 G.N.                                                    Petition disposed of.


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "court accommodation"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.