Maha Govt Too Lazy To Fulfil Duties, 40% Vacancy at MACT Mumbai, No Registrar Since 2019 – Bar Association Moves Bombay HC

"Here it is not the Litigants of any external cause of hindrance in deciding the claims. It is the respondents who have been too lazy to fulfil their duties. The respondents have deliberately and intentionally not taken the petitioner's applications seriously," the plea states regarding representations being made to the State Government since 2016.

According to the petition, MACT Mumbai has eight courtrooms and 124 sanctioned posts. However, only 6 courtrooms have judges and the other two courtrooms have been vacant since 2019. Only 77 positions are filled out of 124. MACT, Mumbai has had over 40% of its posts vacant for the last several years, the petition states.

According to the petition, the procedure of adjudication and disposal of claims is not restricted to the judges who hear and decide the matters. A claim application undergoes a tedious process before it is disposed of. This includes, among others, scrutiny and verification, removal of office objections, issuance of notices, recording of appearance, the entire trial process, compliance of compensation orders, execution of the orders on deposit of the amount, etc.

The petition claims that there are over 10,000 cases pending before the MACT despite considerable efforts to dispose cases through Lok Adalats. It is functioning only at 60% of its fullest capacity. This is not only unjust to the litigants but also towards the overburdened staff. The post of the Registrar has been vacant since 2019 leading to pendency of cases and delay in disposal of the claims, the plea states.

In the plea filed through Advocate Savina Crasto, the petitioner says it was constrained to approach the HC as the state has neglected its representations. The respondents have completely failed and abdicated their duties as enshrined in the provisions of Motor Vehicle Rules, it adds.

According to the petition, the litigants who approach MACT for justice are often severely and permanently injured. Some litigants seek compensation having lost their kith and kin in accidents. Expeditious disposal of claim applications is necessary to repose their faith in the adversarial judicial system.

The petition lists several difficulties that the judges, litigants, and advocates face daily due to lack of adequate staff – i) Weeks long pendency of urgent applications for certified copies, ii) papers lying in the courtrooms even after the proceedings are over and collected in a corner like garbage because of lack of staff, iii) judgements are kept pending due to lack of adequate stenographers iv) court working is affected due to strikes which the over burden staff go on, v) The staff initially appointed for a specific work of force to handle at the profiles.

The petition cites a strike on 27th April 2022 of the working staff that lasted for almost 2 months. Litigants travelling from distant places had to return without having their evidence recorded. Many returned without collecting the claim amount they were awarded. New matters could not be filed as there was no one for verification and those filed weren't numbered for more than a month.

The petition contends that the respondents took no steps to fulfil their obligations despite several follow ups by the petitioner. Their inaction has derailed the method of administration of Justice which in turn has directly affected the most fundamental right of the litigants I.e. right to speedy trials.

The petition prays for directions to the state to fill the vacancies at the MACT Mumbai within time bound period as per the applicable rules.

Further it seeks directions to the respondents to file a comprehensive affidavit explaining the reason for not filling the vacancies at the MACT and the steps taken by them.

It also seeks directions to the respondents to take action on the petitioner's representation regarding the issue within time bound period.

The petition came up before the bench headed by CJ Dipankar Datta and was adjourned to December 5 for further hearing as one of the lawyers was in difficulty.

Case no. – WP(L)/33185/2022

Case title – Bar Association of MACT Mumbai v. State of Maharashtra