9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. T. G. Narayanan Nair, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu Mr., Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, AOR Ms. Naveen Goel, Adv. Mr. Adithya Koshy Roy, Adv. Mr. Adhitya Koshy Roy, Adv. Ms. Siddhi Gupta, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Dr. Reeta Vasishta, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawa, Adv. Mrs. Bani Dixit, Adv. Mr. Shreeyash U Lalit, Adv. Mrs. Tomthinnganb Koijam, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Divyakant Lahoti, AOR Ms. Madhur Jhavar, Adv. Ms. Praveena Bisht, Adv. Ms. Vindhya Mehra, Adv. Mr. Kartik Lahoti, Adv. Mr. Kumar Vinayakam Gupta, Adv. Ms. Mallika Luthra, Adv. Mr. Saksham Barsaiyan, Adv. Mr. Malak Manish Bhatt, AOR Ms. Radhika Gautam, AOR Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Sohhom Sau, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Kurup, AOR Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Adv. Ms. Gauri Goburdhun, Adv. Ms. Aanchal, Adv. Ms. Aparna Arun, Adv. Mr. Akhil Hasija, Adv. Mr. Gurjas Singh Narula, Adv. Mr. K.parameshwar, AOR Ms. Arti Gupta, Adv. Ms. Kanti, Adv. Ms. Aarti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Chinmay Kalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. K. Parameshwar, Amicus Curiae Ms. Kavita Jha, AOR Ms. Kavita Jha, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Aditeya Bal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yan, AOR Ms. Asmita Singh, Adv. Mr. Harshit Goel, Adv. Mr. Sujay Jain, Adv. Mr. K.v. Vibu Prasad, Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Ms. Abhivyakti Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Swain, Adv. Mr. Gajendra Singh Negi, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Garg, Adv. Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR Mr. Amit Sharma, AOR Mr. Dipesh Sinha, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Barua, Adv. Ms. Aparna Singh, Adv. Mr. Rana Sandeep Bussa, Adv. Mr. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, AOR Dr. Wolf Chandra Paul, Adv. Dr. Annie John, Adv. Mr. Dharmendhar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Deepayan Mandal, AOR Mr. Mridul Bansal, Adv. Mr. Naman Varma, Adv. Mr. Ninad Laud, Adv. Mr. Aditya Swain, Adv. Mr. Zubin Dash, Adv. Mr. Dcosta Ivo Manuel Simon, AOR Ms. Arti Gupta, Adv. Ms. Kanti, Adv. Ms. Aarti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Chinmay Kalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. K. Parameshwar, Amicus Curiae Mr. Kishan Chand Jain, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Harsh Parashar, AOR Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. T. G. Narayanan Nair, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M.r., Adv. Ms. Shobha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Aditya Ranjan, AOR Mr. Kawirangbou Charenamei, Adv. Mr. Rituraj Biswas, AOR Mr. P.d. Gupta, Adv. Ms. Neeta Nancy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) High Court of Himachal Pradesh; (viii) High Court of Jharkhand; (ix) High Court of Karnataka; (x) High Court of Kerala; (xi) High Court of Madhya Pradesh; (xii) High Court of Judicature at Madras; (xiii) High Court of Meghalaya; (xiv) High Court of Orissa; (xv) High Court of Judicature at Patna; (xvi) High Court of Punjab and Haryana; (xvii) High Court of Rajasthan; (xviii) High Court of Sikkim; (xix) High Court of Andhra Pradesh; (xx) High Court for the State of Telangana; (xxi) High Court of Uttarakhand; and (xxii) High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh 3. Mr Gautam Narayan, counsel appearing on behalf of the High Court of Delhi states that the response would be filed within a week. Permission is granted to do so. 4. The High Court of Manipur and the High Court of Tripura have not filed any response until date. They are granted a further extension of time until 13 October 2023 to file their responses failing which the Registrars General of the High Courts concerned and the Registrars (IT) shall personally remain present on the next date of hearing. 5. Mr Himanshu Shekhar, counsel appearing on behalf of the NGT states that hybri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aya; (xiii) Mr Shibashish Misra for the High Court of Orissa; (xiv) Mr Gaurav Agrawal for the High Court of Judicature at Patna; (xv) Mr Nidhesh Gupta, senior counsel for the High Court of Punjab and Haryana; (xvi) Dr Charu Mathur for the High Court of Rajasthan; (xvii) Ms Enakshi Mukhopadhyay Siddhanta for the High Court of Sikkim; and (xviii) Ms Uttara Babbar for the High Court for the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. 9. From the discussions which have taken place before the Court, it is evident that there is a considerable variation between High Courts in the level of adoption of technology. Some High Courts have made considerable progress and hearings are being provided through the hybrid mode or video conferencing. Other High Courts have stated that facilities are available. However, when the statistics in regard to the actual number of hearings through video conferencing/hybrid mode have been disclosed, it appears that the performances are abysmal. For instance, in one High Court, as few as 3 hearings have been conducted in the virtual mode in the last three months. 10. In most High Courts, the problem is compounded by the absence of a uniform SOP ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken by all the High Courts to facilitate e-filing. 14. In this backdrop, we issue the following directions: (i) After a lapse of two weeks from the date of this order, no High Court shall deny access to video conferencing facilities or hearing through the hybrid mode to any member of the Bar or litigant desirous of availing of such a facility; (ii) All State Governments shall provide necessary funds to the High Courts to put into place the facilities requisite for that purpose within the time frame indicated above; (iii) The High Courts shall ensure that adequate internet facilities, including Wi-Fi facilities, with sufficient bandwidth are made available free of charge to all advocates and litigants appearing before the High Courts within the precincts of the High Court complex; (iv) The links available for accessing video conferencing/hybrid hearings shall be made available in the daily cause-list of each court and there shall be no requirement of making prior applications. No High Court shall impose an age requirement or any other arbitrary criteria for availing of virtual/hybrid hearings; (v) All the High Courts shall put into place an SOP within a period of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued to the Registrar In-charge of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity ["APTEL"]. Mr K M Nataraj, Additional Solicitor General shall immediately contact the Chairperson of the APTEL and take necessary steps on behalf of the Union of India to ensure that video conferencing/hybrid facilities are made available at APTEL within a period of one month from the date of this order. 16. Above all, it must be noted that technology plays an essential role in securing access to courtrooms and as a result, access to justice for citizens across the country. Lawyers and litigants using electronic gadgets to access files and legal materials cannot be asked to turn the clock back and only refer to paper books. In the march of technology, the Courts cannot remain tech averse. Placing fetters on hybrid hearings, like mandating an age criteria, requiring prior application, and frequent denial of access to virtual participants has the direct effect of discouraging lawyers and litigants to use technology. Not only does this affect the efficiency and access to courts, but it also sends out the misguided message that access to courts can be restricted at whim to those who seek justice. 17. The use o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
