Page 24 - Tehelka-May18

legal

and responsible litigant. This policy is egories requiring assistance must be Financial liability
Supreme Court: also based on the recognition that it is given utmost priority.” To make matters worse, in this appeal,
the responsibility of the Government to

the Union of India engaged 10 lawyers,
Government must The apex court notes that the Union protect the rights of citizens, to respect Lack of concern including an Additional Solicitor Gen-
fundamental rights and those in charge
eral and a senior advocate. This is as per
The Apex Court observed:“None of the
the appearance slip submitted to the
of the conduct of Government litigation
pious platitudes in the National Litiga-
of India must take full responsibility
Registry of this Court. In other words,
tion Policy have been followed indicat-
should never forget this basic principle.
discard ‘let the court for unnecessarily adding to the ing on the core issues involved in the ing not only the Union of India’s lack of the Union of India created a huge fi-
The efficient litigant means “focus-
burden of the justice delivery system,
nancial liability by engaging so many
concern for the justice delivery system
litigation and addressing them square-
lawyers for an appeal whose fate could
but scant regard for its own National
decide’ attitude writes charanjit ahuja ly. Managing and conducting litigation Litigation Policy. The website of the easily be imagined on the basis of exist-
in a cohesive, coordinated and time-
Department of Justice shows that “the
ing orders of dismissal in similar cases.
bound manner. Ensuring that good
ing reviewed and formulation of the
liability, asking the taxpayers to bear an
cases are won and bad cases are not National Litigation Policy, 2010 is be- Yet the Union of India increased its
needlessly persevered with. A litigant National Litigation Policy, 2015 is under avoidable financial burden.
who is represented by competent and consideration. When this will be final- The real question is: When will the
sensitive legal persons: competent in ised is anybody’s guess… There is also Rip Van Winkleism stop and Union of
their skills and sensitive to the facts that India wake up to its duties and respon-
Government is not an ordinary litigant sibilities to the justice delivery system?
and that litigation does not have to be The Supreme To say the least, this is an extremely
won at any cost.” unfortunate situation of unnecessary
The responsible litigant means that Court judgment and avoidable burdening of this Court
litigation will not be resorted to for the clearly raps the through frivolous litigation that calls
sake of litigating. That false pleas and for yet another reminder through the
technical points will not be taken and Government saying imposition of costs on the Union of In-
shall be discouraged, ensuring that that the Union of dia while dismissing the appeal. Do we
the correct facts and all relevant docu- hope that someday some sense, if not
ments will be placed before the court. India must shape up better sense, will prevail on the Union
That nothing will be suppressed from its litigation policy of India with regard to the formulation
hile dismissing the ap- Court was not appreciated. It was not- appeal from the Registry itself. the court and there will be no attempt of a realistic and meaningful
peal of Government of ed that the Union of India must take to mislead any court or Tribunal. Gov- and shun its The judgment is an indictment of
India in Union of India full responsibility for unnecessarily Adding to Court burden ernment must cease to be a compulsive non-cooperative Union of India for pursuing frivolous or
& Ors. Vs. Pirthwi Singh adding to the burden of the justice “The Union of India must appreciate litigant. The philosophy that matters infructuous cases adding to the burden
W & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. delivery system. that by pursuing frivolous or infructu- should be left to the courts for ultimate attitude of the top Court and collaterally harm-
of 2018 arising out of Diary No. 8754 of ous cases, it is adding to the burden of decision has to be discarded. ing other litigants by delaying hearing
2018 Date of Judgment : April 24, 2018), Indictment this Court and collaterally harming The easy approach, “Let the court of their cases through the numbers
the Supreme Court has imposed cost To ensure that the Union of India is far other litigants by delaying hearing of decide,” must be eschewed and con- an action plan to reduce Government or sheer volume. If the Union of India
of 1,00,000 on the Government. The more circumspect, costs of 1,00,000 their cases through the sheer volume demned. The purpose underlying this Litigation which was formulated on cares little for the justice delivery sys-
Judgment says that after dismissal of were imposed and it was observed that of numbers. If the Union of India cares policy is also to reduce Government June 13, 2017. Nothing has been finalised tem, it should at least display some con-
the batch of appeals, the Union of India the Union of India must shape up its little for the justice delivery system, it litigation in courts so that valuable by the Union of India for the last almost cern for litigants, many of whom have
filed yet another appeal on the same litigation policy. Unfortunately, the Un- should at least display some concern court time would be spent in resolving about eight years and under the garb of to spend a small fortune in litigating in
subject being Civil Appeal No. (blank) ion of India has learnt no lesson and has for litigants, many of whom have to other pending cases so as to achieve the ease of doing business, the judiciary is the Supreme Court.
of 2018 (Diary No. 4893 of 2018) entitled continued its non-cooperative attitude. spend a small fortune in litigating in the goal in the National Legal Mission to being asked to reform. The boot is really The Union of India that engaged 10
Union of India & Ors. v. Ex. Nk. The Apex Court in its Judgment said Supreme Court.” reduce average pendency time from 15 on the other leg. ” lawyers, including an Additional So-
Balbir Singh. That appeal came up that the present appeal was filed on The Apex Court observed that on years to 3 years. Litigators on behalf of Interestingly, the Action Plan men- licitor General and a senior advocate
for consideration before the Supreme March 8, 2018, which is also well after June 23, 2010, the Union of India re- Government have to keep in mind the tions, among others, two interesting created a huge financial liability by en-
Court on March 9, 2018, and was dis- the decision in Balbir Singh Turn. “We leased the ‘National Legal Mission to principles incorporated in the National steps to reduce pendency: (i) Avoid gaging so many lawyers for an appeal
missed following the decision in Bal- would have expected that with the reduce average pendency time from 15 mission for judicial reforms which in- unnecessary filing of appeals — ap- whose fate can be easily imagined on
bir Singh Turn. While dismissing the dismissal of the appeal relating years to 3 years’ and this document is cludes identifying bottlenecks which peals should not be filed in routine the basis of existing orders of dismissal
appeal, it was noted that it was filed to Balbir Singh Turn, the Union of called ‘National Litigation Policy’. the Government and its agencies may matters — only in cases where there in similar cases. The moot question like
well after several similar matters were India would take steps to withdraw this The National Litigation Policy is be concerned with and also removing is a substantial policy matter. (ii) Vexa- the Shakespearean “to be or not to be”
dismissed by this Court. appeal from the Registry of this Court based on the recognition that Govern- unnecessary Government cases. Prior- tious litigation should be immediately is when will the Government wake up
The Supreme Court observed that so that it is not even listed and there is ment and its various agencies are the itization in litigation has to be achieved withdrawn. These pendency reduction to its duties and responsibilities to the
conduct of the Union of India in filing no unnecessary burden on the judges.” pre-dominant litigants in courts and with particular emphasis on welfare steps (particularly (ii) above) have been justice delivery system?
Civil Appeals/Special Leave Petitions But obviously, the Union of India has no tribunals in the country. Its aim is to legislation, social reform, weaker sec- conveniently overlooked as far as this
after the issue is concluded by this such concern and did not withdraw its transform Government into an efficient tions and senior citizens and other cat- appeal is concerned. letters@tehelka.com
Tehelka / 31 may 2018 24 www.Tehelka.com Tehelka / 31 may 2018 25 www.Tehelka.com

24-25 Charanjit Ahuja.indd 2-3 17/05/18 3:37 PM