13 Sep 2023 11:13 AM GMT
The Haryana government has informed the High Court that the 'per se contemptuous' letter that it filed in the proceedings concerning delay in appointment of district-level judges, was recommended by the Chief Minister.The letter filed under the signatures of government's Joint Secretary Rashmi Grover said that the government has decided to not accept High Court's "arbitrary" recommendations...
The Haryana government has informed the High Court that the 'per se contemptuous' letter that it filed in the proceedings concerning delay in appointment of district-level judges, was recommended by the Chief Minister.
The letter filed under the signatures of government's Joint Secretary Rashmi Grover said that the government has decided to not accept High Court's "arbitrary" recommendations for promotion of 13 judicial officers as Additional and District Sessions judges.
The Division bench comprising Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan has now summoned the State's Chief Secretary to appear before it tomorrow, at 2 PM.
Earlier in the day, the bench had summoned Grover to explain the contents of the letter inasmuch as it said that Governor is not expected to accept "whatever advice or recommendation" is given by the High Court.
Haryana's AG Baldev Raj Mahajan informed the Court that the letter was inspired from the language used by the Supreme Court in Chandramouleshwar Prasad vs. Patna High Court (1969). The said judgment held as follows:
"The High Court is the body which is intimately familiar with the efficiency and quality of officers who are fit to be promoted as District Judges. The High Court alone knows their merits as also demerits. This does not mean that the Governor must accept whatever advice is given by the High Court but the Article does require that the Governor should obtain from the High Court its views on the merits or demerits of persons among whom the choice of promotion is to be limited..."
The bench then told the AG that Judgement writing is a skill and "when bureaucracy tries to follow they fail at it terribly and this is the classic example." It also refused permission for withdrawal of the letter while orally observing, "you will withdraw so that pass you pass another illegal order".
The matter will now be taken up tomorrow.
Case Title: Shikha and others vs. State of Haryana and others
Appearance: Gurminder Singh, Sr.Advocate
with Simurita Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
B.R.Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana Mr.Arun Beniwal, DAG, Haryana.
Munisha Gandhi, Sr.Advocate with Shubreet Kaur Saron, Advocate, for respondent No.3.