2021 (10) TMI 946 - SC - Customs

Investigation proceedings regarding the anti-dumping - all that the High Court has done is to issue notice in the writ petition and the interlocutory applications calling upon the parties to file responses. - Recalcitrant attitude of the Government in not appointing High Court Judges for years together even where the recommendations have been cleared by the Collegium - HELD THAT - If we peruse the impugned order, all that the High Court has done is to issue notice in the writ petition and the interlocutory applications calling upon the parties to file responses. This can hardly be a stage of a proceeding where the Supreme Court of the country should be asked to step in. The factual matrix paints an even a sorrier picture of the Government s conduct as the Court, conscious of the urgency of the matter, on 4-6-2021 while issuing notice called upon counter affidavits to be filed within four weeks and listed the matter on 19-7-2021. We are informed that the Government did not filed the counter affidavits and took further four weeks' time to file the counter affidavits necessitating the adjournment till 5th October, 2021. And the special leave petition was filed on 17-7-2021. Thus on one hand, the Government does not deem it expedient to even file the counter affidavits while it has the ability to draw the special leave petitions and file the same before this Court. So much for the urgency expressed by the Government of India in the present proceedings - SLP dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in appointment of High Court Judges.
2. Inadequacies in the number of High Court Judges affecting judicial proceedings.
3. Government's conduct in delaying court proceedings.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Delay in appointment of High Court Judges
The Supreme Court addressed the issue of delay in the appointment of High Court Judges due to the government's reluctance to act on Collegium recommendations. The Court highlighted the adverse impact of such delays on the functioning of the judiciary and the timely adjudication of important matters.

Issue 2: Inadequacies in the number of High Court Judges affecting judicial proceedings
The Court emphasized the critical need for an adequate number of High Court Judges to ensure the efficient functioning of the judicial system. It pointed out the challenges faced by High Courts, especially in the capital, due to the shortage of judges, leading to delays in accommodating important matters for early adjudication.

Issue 3: Government's conduct in delaying court proceedings
The Court criticized the government for its conduct in delaying court proceedings despite expressing urgency. It highlighted a specific instance where the government failed to file counter affidavits promptly, causing adjournments and hindering the progress of the case. The Court expressed disappointment in the government's lack of expedience in filing necessary documents while promptly approaching the Supreme Court with special leave petitions.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions due to the government's conduct and emphasized the importance of early adjudication of commercial disputes, which necessitates an adequate number of judges and adherence to timelines set by the Court in previous orders. The judgment underscored the need for the government to address the issue of delays in judicial appointments and ensure the smooth functioning of the judiciary for timely resolution of legal matters.