Rajasthan govt gets HC notice over allegations in House

Rifts between the Rajasthan Government and the judiciary surfaced again today. The High Court issued notices to the government and MLAs for making allegations against the judiciary during Assembly proceedings.

Rifts between the Rajasthan Government and the judiciary surfaced again today. The High Court issued notices to the government and MLAs for making allegations against the judiciary during Assembly proceedings. Terming the incident as unfortunate, the High Court said guidelines were required regarding the level of judicial intervention in such matters.

The notices were issued to the state government, secretary, state Assembly and four MLAs, following a civil writ filed by local lawyer Amit Gupta. On March 20, the MLAs from both parties had participated in a debate against the judiciary.

class="keywordtourl" href="https://indianexpress.com/about/bjp/" class="">BJP MLA Nathusingh Gurjar had stated that despite the fact that the number of judges had increased, there was a steady rise in the number of pending cases. He pointed out that the annual cost of courts over the past five years had increased from Rs 86 crore to Rs 177 crore, adding that there was a need to make the judiciary accountable.

Story continues below this ad

Congress MLA Durgaprasad Agarwal, on the other hand, alleged that the courts only entertained PILs filed by NGOs and that orders delivered were biased and negative. Both MLAs, along with Madan Rathod (BJP) and Mohammad Mahir Azad (INC), have been issued notices.

Prior to the assembly incident, the Vasundhara Raje government clashed with the judiciary over the appointment of the Law Secretary. The government had appointed an IAS officer to the post while the judiciary wanted somebody from its fraternity. Two days after the outburst of MLAs in the assembly, the state government withdrew its order.

However, offended lawyers in Jaipur held protests against the government while Gupta filed a civil writ. The High Court on Wednesday showed concern on “why due care was not taken under Article 211 at the time of discussion in the said matter and as to why had the speaker taking the note of Article 211, did not bother or could not exclude the remarks made against the judges and judiciaries?”

The High Court also observed that the Leader of the House and the Leader of Opposition had also failed to take initiative in this regard.