Read Time: 06 minutes

There were two instances in Justice Chandrachud’s court where he made it clear that Supreme Court cannot interfere in High Court’s affairs beyond a point. The first instance was when a counsel sought for the Supreme Court to direct a High Court to expeditiously hear and dispose a civil matter. Justice Chandrachud made it clear that the Supreme Court cannot keep interfering in the High Court’s daily operations.

He said “We can pass such directions only in time sensitive criminal matters, not in every matter.” He added “The High Courts are reeling under immense pressure and the judges feel very strongly when we pass such directions where it is not required.”

The second instance was when the court was hearing a PIL filed by a lawyer called Ghanshyam Upadhyay challenging Bombay High Court’s notification dated 10th January 2022 according to which the court hours was shortened. The notification stated that the court which usually starts at 10.30 AM would start at 12 PM and would end at 3 PM instead of 4.30 PM. This was done owing to the sudden spike in COVID-19 cases in the country in general and Bombay city in particular.

While the plea had become infructuous owing to the Bombay High Court reverting back to its regular functioning hours, there was an elaborate discussion on virtual hearings and how  it would benefit some lawyers practicing in Bombay High Court have to endure excessive travel to appear in their matter. Justice Chandrachud noted, “Some lawyers travel all the way from Pune to Bombay everyday, they take Deccan Queen in the morning to reach Bombay by 9.30 .AM They finish their matters, take the same train back and start preparing for the next day’s matters after they reach Pune at 9.30 PM in the night.”

He also spoke of his Personal Secretary at Bombay High Court who would travel from far away to discharge their duty. He said “My own PS would leave home at 6.30 AM, reach the court at 9.30 and leave again at 5.30 PM. They would have to pick up their children on their way back home and finally reach home by 9.30 PM.”

However while reverting back to the hearing of the case, another counsel had moved an application in the same case seeking virtual hearings in Bombay Courts.  The lawyer contended that despite there being an option for virtual court, some courts in Bombay were not following them  Justice Chandrachud’s brother judge in the bench Justice Surya Kant remarked “We can’t sit here and direct courts to make arrangements for virtual hearings. There are so many factors that go into such things, like the dynamics in the Bar and circumstances at the courts.”

Justice Chandrachud remarked “Every high court has its own set of very conditions, we cannot issue a mandamus to the chief justice of the high courts that you will only work on the virtual platform.” Justice Chandrachud further added that “Every high court deals with  its administrative issues in its own way. If you have a problem, meet the chief justice, senior judges, registrar general and tell them what is required.”