Other States - Madhya Pradesh   

Plea seeking High Court bench at Bhopal dismissed

Staff Correspondent

‘Many benches in the State will reduce the ‘aura’ of High Court’

BHOPAL: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking a Circuit Court of the High Court here in Bhopal and also a request that the Indore and Gwalior benches of the Court be empowered to entertain and decide all types of cases.

The writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by petitioner Satya Pal Anand, an advocate of the Court, came up for consideration before the Division Bench of Justice Deepak Verma and Justice S.C. Sinha. Mr. Justice Verma passed the order dismissing the petition.

The order states: “Perusal of the relevant provision of law shows that it is the sole discretion and prerogative of the Chief Justice to form an opinion and to decide if any Circuit Court or bench is required to be established in the State. In the case in hand, there is no such opinion of the Chief Justice to have a Circuit Court at Bhopal and hence there was no merit or substance in the petition and it was absolutely misconceived.”

About several assertions in support of the demand for a bench of the High Court in Bhopal, the High Court order says there is a principal seat at Jabalpur and permanent Benches in Indore and Gwalior. This arrangement, which was envisaged at the time of formation of the State of Madhya Pradesh, is catering well to the needs of the litigating public. It goes on to emphasise that the “glory and aura” of the High Court cannot be reduced to that a glorified District Court by having so many benches or Circuit Courts within the State.

The order says that the State of Madhya Pradesh has already been bifurcated and a number of districts have been carved out from the original State of Madhya Pradesh to form the State of Chhattisgarh. With regard to the demand to empower the Indore and Gwalior benches to entertain all types of cases, the Division Bench has said that this also has no merit and substance.

The petitioner had cited Section 51 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and its sub-sections--(1) The principal seat of the High Court for a new State shall be at such place as the President may, by notified order, appoint; (2)The President may, after consultation with the Governor of a new State and the Chief Justice of the High Court for that State, by notified order, provide for the establishment of a permanent Bench or benches of that High Court at one or more places within the State other than the principal seat of the High Court and for any matters connected therewith; and sub-section (3) which says “Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) and sub-section (2), the Judges and Division Courts of the High Court for a new State may also sit at such other place or places in that State as the Chief Justice may with the approval of the Governor appoint.

The petitioner particularly drew the attention of the Court towards sub-section (3) of Section 51 of the Act and took the plea that since the State was a party in more than 70 per cent of the cases pending before the High Court and this was causing a burden on the exchequer, a Circuit Court could be directed to be established in the State Capital.

With reference to the State of Maharashta vs Narayan Shamrao Puranik and others case (AIR 1982 SC 1198 and AIR 1983 SC 46) cited by the petitioner to strengthen his case, the High Court order says that in both these cases, the challenge was to the order of the Bombay High Court wherein the notification issued by the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court in exercise of his powers under Sub-section (3) of Section 51 of the Act, with the prior approval of the State Governor , by which he appointed Aurangabad as a place where the Judges and Division Courts of the Bombay High Court shall sit, was quashed.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Plea seeking High Court bench at Bhopal dismissed
M.P. Minister passes away

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu