Puisne judges of the High Court cannot encroach upon the supremacy of the Chief Justice when it comes to the administrative control, regulation and functioning of the registry and its staff, the Gujarat High Court held on Monday [High Court of Gujarat v Babubhai Sampatbhai Pateliya & Ors].

A Division Bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice RT Vachhani made the observation while expunging the strictures passed by a single-judge against the court registry over delay in installation of CCTV cameras inside the court premises including the registry office.

The Court said the single-judge had passed the order by traveling beyond his roster after amalgamating different writ petitions having distinct jurisdiction and roster.

"On an overall assessment of the issue, though, we commend the concern expressed by the learned single-judge relating to the issue of installation of the CCTV cameras, with due respect, we hold that the learned Single Judge in his judicial capacity lacks the authority to command the registry in any way on the issue, which exclusively lies under the domain and control of The Hon’ble the Chief Justice, as doing so would go against the authority, control and supremacy of The Hon’ble the Chief Justice," it said.

The Court further said that administrative functions of different departments or registry of the High Court significantly contribute towards maintaining the majesty, grandeur and repute of the High Court.

Such standards can only be achieved by reposing full faith in the Chief Justice, it added. Any act or issue which bristles with such authority can always be sorted out on the administrative side, the Court further said.

"The puisne Judges cannot encroach on the supremacy of the Chief Justice, when it comes to administrative control, regulation and functions of the Registry and its staff, unless it is specifically delegated or assigned to a Judge or Committee on Administrative Side by the Chief Justice," the Court said.

The controversy has its origins in the order passed by Justice Sandeep N Bhatt on August 18. Justice Bhatt had expressed surprise that the 2023 order for installation of CCTV cameras in the court premises had not been implemented despite a direction to comply with it by January 2024.

"This Court had passed the order by way of exhortation to see that the functioning which is going on in the premises of the highest Court of this State is transparent and in case of some wrongs which are alleged in the process, the same can be traced out with the help of such CCTV footages and therefore this Court had passed the order to install CCTV cameras in every corner of the Registry by covering every table as well as the important places in the corridors of the High Court as well as other important places of the High Court campus. It seems that this attempt is misunderstood as renegade by the concerned persons," the Court had remarked.

The single-judge had also said that its order was being considered "a storm in a tea cup" and that an earlier Registrar (IT) had tried to place this matter under the carpet by "misleading the concerned persons" in the High Court administration.

This process can be equated with the process of the other departments of some of the government institutions which the Court often calls out as red tapism, Justice Bhatt had observed.

Justice Bhatt's order was subsequently challenged by the High Court through present Registrar (IT).

Today, the Division Bench set aside the single-judge order and further stayed the monitoring of the issue of installation of CCTV cameras in the registry by Justice Bhatt

"The Hon’ble the Chief Justice is already apprised of the status of installation of CCTV cameras in the Registry of the High Court, and the same is under active implementation. The strictures passed against the Registry are directed to be deleted. We hereby stay further monitoring by the learned Single Judge on the issue of installation of the CCTV cameras in the Registry in Special Criminal Application No.996 of 2020," it ordered.

Pertinently, Justice Bhatt had earlier too been at odds with the court registry.

In February this year, the Chief Justice changed his roster after he raised serious questions over the conduct of then Registrar (SCMS & ICT) AT Ukrani.

In a strongly-worded order passed on February 13, Justice Bhatt had said that he was “flabbergasted” that Ukrani had been working with the registry of the High Court for the past six years.

During this period, Ukrani has been a subject of controversy and has caused misunderstandings among judges of the High Court, Justice Bhatt had said.

Senior Advocate Shalin Mehta with advocate Hamesh C Naidu represented the High Court of Gujarat.

[Read Order]