"Judges Work For 16-17 Hours & People File Such Pleas?": Gujarat HC Refuses To Reduce Cost On Advocate For Plea Against Roster System

The Gujarat High Court today refused to reduce the cost of Rs. 1 Lakh imposed upon an advocate yesterday who had moved the petition challenging the roster system. The Court expressed its disappointment over the filing of such pleas.

Essentially, earlier today, when the president of the Gujarat High Court Advocates' Association (GHAA), Senior Advocate Asim Pandya requested the bench to consider a reduction of the cost, Chief Justice Aravind Kumar said: "Let him (Advocate) file application, we will consider it but won't reduce cost."

To this, Senior Advocate Pandya said that it is his earnest request and that the advocate is not such a person who can bear the cost of Rs. 1 Lakh. However, CJ Aravind Kumar said that though Mr. Pandya was doing a good job and that whenever there is a cause related to advocate he meets him in his chamber to resolve the issues, however, CJ advised him to not espouse the wrong cause.

He further said that if the Advocate wants to move an application, he can do so that the bench was not preventing it and in case he files it, the bench shall consider the same on merits, however, the bench did add that it would assure you anything as it wasn't guaranteeing anything.

At the moment, when Senior Advocate Pandya insisted on his request, Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri interpolated and said:

"Mr. Pandya are you not seeing that judges are working beyond 6? Saturday, Sunday we are spending. For all these reactions? We are working around the clock and you people are filing such kinds of petitions. It is demoralizing."

To this, CJ Aravind Kumar remarked:

"See, it will have a cascading effect on the judges. You just imagine my brother (Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri) getting agitated, and how it has hurt (us). It demoralizes the institution. You collect the cost from the bar association."

Further, Justice Ashutosh J. Shastri also said:

"Most of the judges are working for 16-17 hours and you people are filing such pleas & you (Sr. Adv Pandya) are supporting it."

To this, Sr. Adv Pandya said that he was not supporting it and that it was just pushing the concerned advocate's personal request to persuade the court to reconsider the cost aspect. Sr. Adv Pandya also agreed with Justice Shastri that the judges are indeed working hard and that such a petition by the Advocate Concerned was "misconceived".

He also submitted that the advocate concerned was ready to give an undertaking that he won't be filing such petitions again, however, unimpressed, the Court refused to entertain the request of Mr. Pandya.

It may be noted that yesterday, the advocate concerned, appearing as party-in-person, moved a PIL plea challenging the roster/listing system functioning at the Gujarat HC. It was his categorical case that the change in the roster would lead to a situation wherein the old matters heard by a bench will now be required to be heard by a different bench.

Dismissing his plea, the Court had imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on him.