Practical Solution Needed At Earliest To Address Issue Of Frequent Vacancy In DRTs: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has taken note of the issue of “frequent vacancy” arising in the national capital's Debt Recovery Tribunals, observing that the issue needs consideration and a practical solution has to be found at the earliest.

A division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain noted that out of the three DRTs in Delhi, only two are functional currently.

“Now one more Presiding Officer is stated to have put in his papers because of his appointment in another Tribunal. This would leave only one functional DRT with the pendency of over 17,000 cases of all DRTs,” it observed.

Amicus Curiae Advocate Sanjeev Bhandari submitted that the possible reason for frequent vacancy might be the “disproportionate remuneration” offered to the DRT Presiding Officers as compared to other Tribunals.

Taking note of the submission, the court said:

“The learned Amicus Curiae seeks to submit a note in this regard. Let the same be filed before the next date. A copy of the same be supplied to Mr. Kirtiman Singh, the learned CGSC for R-3 (Union of India) for him to obtain instructions.”

The amicus curiae also told court that the files of pending and disposed-of cases are occupying a lot of space in the DRTs and some solution needs to be found immediately.

Accordingly, the bench sought an affidavit from the Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services on the efforts for digitization of records and operationalising of the e-filing facility.

“After all it is now an accepted norm that digitization of records is the way forward for freeing-up precious office space. Also utility of filing of physical copies would be examined, when e-filing of petitions has been permitted and/or operationalized at the DRTs,” the court said.

On the issue of inadequate facilities for Presiding Officers and Registrars of DRTs, the court directed the Union of India to put remedial measures in place.

The matter will now be heard on April 19.

Earlier, the court had sought response of the Union of India on augmentation of number of DRTs to deal with large pendency of cases and the facilities for efficient conduct of proceedings.

It had directed the Registrar of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) to file a status report regarding renovation work being carried out for re-creation of the court rooms in question so as to facilitate conduct of meaningful proceedings.

Title: INDU KAPOOR v. AU SMALL FINANCE BANK & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 306

Click Here To Read Order