Read Time: 06 minutes

In an unusual move, the administration of High Court of Calcutta has moved the Supreme Court on Monday challenging its own a Single Bench order seeking specific guidelines on the administrative roles of the chief justice or the acting chief justice.

The petition has been filed through Advocate-on-Record Diksha Rai.

This unusual turn of events could possibly be a sign of widening gulf between the judges of the High Court over modus operandi of the administrative matters.

The SLP comes in wake of a July 19 order passed by Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya questioning the manner in which a case being heard by him was transferred to a Division Bench midway. Justice Bhattacharya made some caustic observations, even had gone to the extent of using words like ‘Chutzpah’, in the said order over the actions taken by the acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal. 

“’Chutzpah' (Yiddish) is probably not appreciated in the higher echelons of power. However, opacity creates whispers in the corridors and is not healthy for a judicial system,” the order of Justice Bhattacharyya reads.

Also, being disturbed by connectivity concerns during virtual hearing on the July 19 case, Justice Bhattacharya reprimanded the registrar general and the central project coordinator stating why proceedings should not be initiated for criminal contempt of court due to continuous interference in virtual hearings in each and every matter.

In the 10-page judgment before releasing the case (Jadav Saredar v. Basudeb Tarafder) to the Division Bench, Justice Bhattacharya while expressing reservations about the way it was assigned to a division bench by the Acting Chief Justice, had stated,

“No division bench can have determination to take up civil revisional applications, which concept is learnt by the junior most advocates at the time of their entry to the Bar. Since this bench had determination on the relevant date, that is July 16, 2021 as well as today, I felt it most indecent that, without showing the minimum courtesy of contacting me directly, the matter was sought to be assigned before some other Bench.”

Justice Bhattacharya even went on to pass remarks about the role Chief Justice performs as ‘master of roster’. The power of master of roster has to be exercised in conformity with the rules framed by the Court, the order stated.

"The power of assignment springing from the "Master of Roster" concept, confines the Chief Justice's administrative power to assign specific Benches for taking up specific types of matters, which cannot be exercised at the whims of the Registrar General or even the Acting Chief Justice," the order further reads.

It is reported that Calcutta High Court Bar Library Club secretary said on Monday that senior judges of the High Court including Justices I. P. Mukerji, Soumen Sen, Subrata Talukdar, Tapabrata Chakraborty, and Shivakant Prasad, informed the three bars representing advocates about the said SLP having been filed and that discussions on the issue of assignment of matters to Judges would have to wait until the outcome of the SLP.