Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to lay down “yardsticks and restraints” that will have to be exercised while summoning government officials.
Indicating its intention to pass an order in this regard on Friday, a bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra said officers should be asked to appear only in cases where there is non-compliance, not in pending matters as an affidavit will do the job in such cases.
“We’ll formulate guidelines regarding summoning of officers. We’ll also lay down some yardsticks, the restraints that should be exercised in summoning the officers,” the CJI remarked while considering a plea against the Allahabad High Court order summoning two government officials and ordering their custody.
The bench during the hearing told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the court had gone through the draft SOP (standard operating procedure) and there are some points which actually say how judicial review should be exercised.
“We’ve seen the SOP, some parts of the SOP deal with how judicial review should be exercised,” CJI said.
During the hearing, the solicitor general said courts should restrain from summoning the chief secretary. “(for) Some issues the chief secy should come. It’s not a matter of ego. But in case finance secy is handling the matter he would know better. What happens is three-fourths of officers will have to come. Instead, it’s more effective for a person who is dealing with the file to come,” Mehta said.
The SOP was submitted against the backdrop of various HC orders summoning government officials to court or contempt proceedings.
The five-page SOP submitted by the solicitor general that aims to create a more conducive environment between judiciary and government suggests calling the officials only in “exceptional cases” and not as a matter of routine.
“Courts should practice restraint while summoning the officials during the hearing of cases including contempt cases. In exceptional circumstances wherein there is no option other than the concerned government official to be present in person in the court, due notice for in-person appearance must be served in advance to such official,” the SOP said.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to lay down “yardsticks and restraints” that will have to be exercised while summoning government officials.
Indicating its intention to pass an order in this regard on Friday, a bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra said officers should be asked to appear only in cases where there is non-compliance, not in pending matters as an affidavit will do the job in such cases.
“We’ll formulate guidelines regarding summoning of officers. We’ll also lay down some yardsticks, the restraints that should be exercised in summoning the officers,” the CJI remarked while considering a plea against the Allahabad High Court order summoning two government officials and ordering their custody.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
The bench during the hearing told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the court had gone through the draft SOP (standard operating procedure) and there are some points which actually say how judicial review should be exercised.
“We’ve seen the SOP, some parts of the SOP deal with how judicial review should be exercised,” CJI said.
During the hearing, the solicitor general said courts should restrain from summoning the chief secretary. “(for) Some issues the chief secy should come. It’s not a matter of ego. But in case finance secy is handling the matter he would know better. What happens is three-fourths of officers will have to come. Instead, it’s more effective for a person who is dealing with the file to come,” Mehta said.
The SOP was submitted against the backdrop of various HC orders summoning government officials to court or contempt proceedings.
The five-page SOP submitted by the solicitor general that aims to create a more conducive environment between judiciary and government suggests calling the officials only in “exceptional cases” and not as a matter of routine.
“Courts should practice restraint while summoning the officials during the hearing of cases including contempt cases. In exceptional circumstances wherein there is no option other than the concerned government official to be present in person in the court, due notice for in-person appearance must be served in advance to such official,” the SOP said.
