JUDGMENT
S.S. Sodhi and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
1. On the plea that “something disturbing has happened which has created in the minds of the applicant a fear or at least a suspicion that he may not get justice from this Court”, Shri Bhajan Lal, the Chief Minister of Haryana, who is arrayed as one of the respondents in this writ petition, prays that it be not heard by this Bench.
2. According to Shri Bhajan Lal, two aspects have shaken his confidence. In the first instance, it is said, that the matter had been fixed before the Tax Bench consisting of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ and one of us (S.S. Sodtii, JJ) was the Acting Chief Justice for a few days, the case was ‘called’ from said Bench. It was later ‘released’ from the Bench presided over by S.S. Sodhi, J. which meant that it was to be heard by some other Bench but it has again been listed for hearing before the ‘same Bench’. Next, that other Judges have taken exception, some in writing too, to the matter being withdrawn from the Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. and being heard by this very Bench’.
3. A reference to the records shows that the present writ petition came up for preliminary hearing on February 7,1992, before a Division Bench comprising S.S. Sodhi and G.C. Garg, JJ., when it was admitted to bearing by a Division Bench and interim relief was also granted to the petitioner. Notice regarding stay was, however, ordered to be given to the respondents. On May 6, 1992, when the matter came up for confirmation of the interim stay before the Division Bench consisting of S.S. Sodhi and R.S. Mongia, JJ. the following order was passed:-
“Learned counsel for the parties informed that the arguments on the stay matter are likely to take as much time as on the main case itself. This being so, let the main case be set down for hearing on 3.8.1992.” It would, thus, be seen that this writ petition was ordered to be taken up for hearing on August 3,1992.
4. On the Friday, preceding August 3,1992, the Advocate General, Haryana, Mr. Hira Lal Sibal, who now appears for the respondents, will recall that he had made a request seeking an adjournment in the hearing of this case on August 3, 1992. This request was acceded to. On Monday August 3, 1992, however it was discovered that this writ petition, had instead been listed before the Division Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. This also incidentally happened to be the day that S.S. Sodhi, J. took over as Acting Chief Justice of this Court, upon the Chief Justice proceeding leave. It was in these circumstances that under the orders of the Acting Chief Justice, the writ petition was ordered to be delisted from the Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. and be listed before the 1st Bench which was then presided over by S.S. Sodhi, J. It continued on the list of this Bench till October 21, 1992.
5. Before proceeding further, it would be pertinent to note here that S.S. Sodhi, J. was the Acting Chief Justice from August 3,1992 to August 20,1992. On August 21, 1992, Chief Justice M. Rama Jois resumed charge as Chief Justice. It was upon his resignation that on September 1, 1992. S.S. Sodhi, J. again took over as Acting Chief Justice and held this position, till November 13,1992. The present Chief Justice S.D. Agarwala, took over as such on November 14,1992.
6. Coming back to the present writ petition, on October 21, 1992, under the orders of the Acting Chief Justice S.S. Sodhi, this writ petition was delisted from the Bench presided over by him and listed before the Bench comprising A.L. Bahri and Ashok Bhan, JJ. which had been constituted as the Tax Bench. It remained before this Bench till the winter vacation in December 1992.
7. After the winter break, this writ petition was not listed before any Division Bench till April 26, 1993, when it was again put up before the then Tax Bench which comprised of A.L. Bahri and G.C.Garg, JJ. and thereafter it remained on the list of this Bench till the summer vacation.
8. On the reopening of the Court after the summer vacations, our Bench i.e. of S.S. Sodhi and Ashok Bhan, JJ. was designated as the Tax bench and was consequently under the specific orders of the Chief Justice of July 5, 1993, this case came to be listed before us.
9. Another relevant fact which deserves mention here, pertains to the order passed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. 7700 of 1992 on August 24, 1992, where it was ordered that this writ petition and other filed pertaining to the subsequent year, be disposed of ‘as expeditiously as possible but not later than three months from today.’ It was in the context of this order of the Supreme Court that the petitioners filed an application for this writ petition to be taken up for hearing out of turn. It came up before us on August 25, 1993. Notice was ordered to be issued to the respondents. On August 30, 1993, in the presence of counsel for both the parties, the writ petition was ordered to be taken up for hearing on September 13, 1993 at No. 1. It was in pursuance of this order that actual hearing in this writ petition commenced after lunch on September 13,1993, as there was a part heard matter with which the Bench remained busy before lunch. Its hearing continued on September 14,1993, when on the joint request of counsel for the parties, it was adjourned for further hearing to October 4, 1993. Arguments were next heard on October 4, 1993, it was only on October 5, 1993 that the present application was filed praying therein that this writ petition be not heard by this Bench.
10. In the background of the facts as narrated, the circumstances that this writ petition had been delisted from the Division Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. on August 3,1992, cannot possibly provide any occasion to the applicant to entertain any apprehension that he would not get justice from this Bench. In this behalf, it would be pertinent to note that the writ petition remained pending before the Bench presided over by S.S. Sodhi, J. from August 3, 1992 to October 21,1992 but it was not taken up for hearing. Further, it was under the orders of S.S. Sodhi, J. as Acting Chief Justice that it was delisted from his Bench and sent to another Bench and thereafter it remained before other Benches or lay in the Registry, until this Bench was constituted as the Tax Bench in July 1993 and then under the specific written orders of the Chief Justice it was put before this Bench.
11. Further, it was on the application of the petitioners and in the presence of counsel for both the parties, in the context of the order of the Supreme Court, that the matter be heard within a specific time frame, which incidentally had long since passed, that the writ petition was ordered to be taken for hearing on September 13, 1993. An aspect of material significance here is the fact that this application has now been moved after, considerable time of the Bench has been taken up in hearing arguments.
12. Turning now to the next ground of the applicant’s apprehension, namely that other Judges of this Court had taken exception, some in writing too, to this writ petition having been withdrawn from the Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. what we find from the record are two letters written by one Hon’ble Judge of this Court, namely, G.R. Majithia, J. In the first instance it was on October 22, 1992, that a letter was written by him to the Registrar (Judicial). This reads as under:
“On October 20, 1992, at 10 A.M. I summoned you in my chamber and asked you to submit report relating to the delisting of C.W.P. No. 1898 of 1992 titled as:-
Jindal Strips Limited Hisar
Versus
1. State of Haryana through its Secretary to the Government Excise & Taxation Department, Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh.
2. The Deputy Excise & Taxation Commissioner-cum-Assessing Authority, Hissar.
3. Shri Bhajan Lal, Chief Minister of Haryana, Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, from the VI D.B. consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.P. Choudhary and Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.K. Sodhi. No compliance of my orders has been made so far. This case came up for motion hearing on February 7, 1992, before the D.B. consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhi and Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.C. Garg and the following order was passed:-
“Admitted to D.B. Operation of Annexure P-194 and 195 is stayed till further orders.
Notice regarding stay.”
The stay matter came up for the hearing before the D.8. consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhi and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.S. Mongia on May 6, 1992 and the following order was passed :-
“Learned counsel for the parties informed that the arguments on the stay matter are likely to take as much time as on the main case itself. This being so, let the main case be set down for hearing on 3.8.1992.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Rama Jois, the Chief Justice of this Hon’ble Court (as he then was) had directed you to enlist all tax (motion & regular) matters before the VI D.B. consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.P. Choudhary and Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.K. Sodhi. This being a tax matter, as is apparent from the indication given by the office at the top of the file, was enlisted before the DB at Sr. No. 342. Hon’ble the Chief Justice (as he then was) proceeded on leave w.e.f. August 1, 1992, to August 21, 1992. C.W.P. No. 1898 of 1992 was delisted from VI D.B. and was enlisted before the I.D.B. presided over by the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhi and it continued to remain on the cause list of that Bench.
Please state reasons for which Civil Writ Petition No. 1898 of 1982 was delisted from the regular DB hearing tax matters and enlisted for hearing before the 1st D.B. presided over by Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhi. More particularly when Hon’ble the Chief Justice Mr. Justice M. Rama Jois (as he then was) was on leave.
The instruction regarding fixing of cases before various DBs and SBs had been given by him to you. The report should be submitted within an hour from the receipt of this communication.
Sd/- G.R. Majithia, Judge”
13. The significant point to note here is that this letter was written on October 22,1992, whereas, as pointed out earlier, this writ petition had been delisted from the Bench presided over by S.S. Sodhi J. on October 21, 1992 and listed before the Tax Bench of A.L. Bahri and Ashok Bhan, JJ. Further, the delisting of this writ petition from the Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ. took place on August 3, 1992 and it was after almost 2-1/2 months that it was sought to be questioned in this manner. This letter by the order of the Acting Chief Justice was filed.
14. Next, there is another letter by G.R. Majithia, J. This time to the Hon’ble Chief Justice, which was written to him on September 13, 1993. This is reproduced here under:
"G.R. Majithia Judge
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
CHANDIGARH
September 13, 1993.
My dear Chief Justice,
I am enclosing herewith a photostat copy of the communication dated October 22, 1992 addressed to the Registrar (Judicial). The same was received by him at 11.30 A.M. and he furnished his reply at 12.25 P.M. on the same day. The note is self-explanatory. Under the orders of the Acting Chief Justice, as it now transpires from a note appended by B.L.Gulati, this case was delisted from the list of the bench presided over by the Acting Chief Justice on October 21, 1992, and thereafter it was enlisted before Vth DB for October 21,1992. Now this case has again been enlisted for hearing before the II DB at Sr. No. 375.1 shall be grateful if you kindly let me know under what circumstances this case has again been enlisted for hearing before the IIDB presided over by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhis I shall also be grateful if the reply is sent to me expeditiously.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/- G.R. Majithia
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.D. Aggarwal
Chief Justice, Punjab & Haryana High Court Chandigarh
Sd/- S.D. Aggarwal, 13.9.93
Addl. Registrar (Judicial)
Received in the Court at 12.45 P.M.”
15. The pertinent circumstance to note here is that September 13, 1993 was the date fixed for the hearing of this writ petition by this Bench. According to the noting made thereon, this letter was received by the Hon’ble Chief Justice at 12.45 P.M. on that day in Court. The Hon’ble Chief Justice on this sought a report from the Additional Registrar (Judicial). The report submitted by the Additional Registrar (Judicial) on the same day being :-
“Regarding letter dated 13th Sept. 1993 from Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.R. Majithia in CWP No. 1898 of 1992 etc.
In this connection it is submitted that in SLP No. 7700 of 1992, arising out of CWP No. 5864 of 1992, the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed orders dated 24.8.1992, inter alia, observing as under :-
“It is appropriate that two writ petitions viz. CWP 1898 of 1992 and CWP No. 5864 of 1992 be taken up together and disposed off by the Hon’ble Court expeditiously…..”
At that time the position was that CWP No. 1898 of 1992 was already on the Board of Vth DB consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.L. Behri, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan, since 27.10.1992. However, the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court were not put up by the dealing assistant due to which steps for its implementation could not be taken. On 4th January, 1993 due to change of Roster CWP No. 1898 of 1992 alongwith some other cases was, however, delisted from the Board of Hon’ble V D.B.
The orders dated 24.8.1992 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court were processed in April, 1993 and under the orders dated 26.4.1993 passed by Hon’ble Chief Justice both the writ petitions i.e. CWP No. 1898 of 1992 and CWP No. 5864 of 1992, were listed before the VI DB consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.L. Bahri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.C. Garg, because the tax matters were being heard by that bench at that time.
The Roster was changed w.e.f. 5.7.1993 and the tax matters were allocated to II DB consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.S. Sodhi and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan. Accordingly when the aforesaid writ petitions were listed for hearing before the II DB and are continuing before that bench.
Sd/- Addl. Registrar (Judicial)
13.9.1993
Hon’ble Chief Justice,
Sd/-13.9.1993.”
16. It was on the same day i.e. September 13, 1993 that the Hon’ble Chief Justice signed it obviously to denote that no action was required to be taken on the letter of G.R. Majithia, J. of that date.
17. Great stress was sought to be Lald by Mr. Hira Lal Sibal, counsel for the Chief Minister of Haryana, upon these two letters of G.R. Majithia, J. namely, those of October 22, 1992 and September 13, 1993 to say that it was these letters that really created an apprehension in his mind that he may not get justice from this Bench, inasmuch as if a Judge of this Court could entertain such doubts, the applicant would be more than justified in harbouring such apprehensions.
18. Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Shanti Bhushan, on the other hand, sought to question, both the locus standi as also the propriety of a Judge of this Court, writing such letters and showing undue interest, in any particular matter pending before other Bench. It was further his contention that mere withdrawal of a case from one Bench could provide on occasion to him to write such letters particularly when at no time had this writ petition ever been fixed before G.R. Majithia, J.
19. Taking up the contention of the Advocate General, Haryana, what stands out is the glaring omission on the part of the Chief Minister of Haryana to mention his source of information that led him to say, in his application that some Judges had taken exception to the writ petition having been withdrawn from the Bench of A.P. Chowdhri and N.K. Sodhi, JJ.
20. Be that as it may, as regards these letters of G.R. Majithia, J., judicial restrain impels us to refrain from comment, except to say, that it does not lie with any Judge to question the listing of any case before any particular Bench nor is the Chief Justice answerable for doing so. If at all the remedy is for the parties to seek and not any other Judge.
21. Such being the situation and the circumstances being as narrated, there can be no manner of doubt that the apprehensions of Shri Bhajan Lal Chief Minister of Haryana as expressed in his application, are wholly unfounded and nor such that any reasonable man could entertain and therefore, we see no reason for us not to hear this writ petition.
22. In the interests of justice, however in order to enable Shri Bhajan Lal to move the Supreme Court in this matter, if he is so advised, despite our direction that we would be hearing arguments from day to day until their completion, we will refrain from hearing this matter till October 12,1993.
23. This application, is, in these terms, hereby dismissed.