Fast Track Court of Addl. District Judge competent to hear matters under Guardians and Wards Act: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court recently held that an Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court is not subordinate to District Court so far as judicial function is concerned and such Fast Track Court is competent to hear matter under Guardian and Wards Act of 1890 without any general or special order from the High Court to that effect [Tamailka Bose v. Mukut Bose]..However, Justice Kesang Doma Bhutia held that a Fast Track Court cannot independently receive presentation of any application under the Guardians and Wards Act but can only discharge those functions assigned to them by District Judge."Jurisdiction to entertain application under the Act of 1890 has exclusively been vested upon District Judge being Principal Judge in Civil Court of original jurisdiction over local limits of its jurisdiction within District. When an application under the Act is transferred to Additional District Judge by District Judge, the Additional District Judge is competent to consider said application as a Judge of a District Court and his competence cannot be challenged for want of authorization (from High Court) under Section 4 A of the said Act," the Court held.While it is true that a judge of a Fast Track Court is appointed as Additional District Judge on the basis of ad hoc promotion and their service is subject to regularization in the cadre of District Judge entry level on their passing limited competitive examination or on promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, but like a District Judge or regular Additional District Judge it has power to hear all the cases both civil and criminal which a District Judge or a regular Additional Judge can hear and dispose of, the High Court held."This Court is of view that Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court is not a subordinate to District Court so far as judicial function is concerned and as such Additional Fast Track Court is competent to hear matter under Guardian and Wards Act and there is no need of any general or special order from the High Court to empower Fast Track Court under Section 4 A of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 to dispose of any proceeding under the Act," the order further said..In the present matter, one Mukat Bose, father of a minor child had filed an application under Section 24 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, before the District Judge, Howrah who subsequently transferred the case to the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court for disposal. The said application was challenged by his wife before the High Court on the ground that a Fast Track Court is subordinate to a District Court and not empowered by the High Court to hear matter under the said Act..The Court recorded that it is an admitted position of law that the Calcutta High Court has not empowered any officer subordinate to the District Judge to hear and dispose of any proceeding under the Guardians and Wards Act. Further, Section 4A of the said Act provides that it is the District Judge who has the original power to hear a matter under the Act unless the High Court empowers any officer exercising original civil jurisdiction subordinate to a District Court to dispose of any proceeding under the said Act."The District Judge may by order in writing may transfer any case under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 at any stage of the proceeding pending before it for disposal to any officer subordinate to the District Court, empowered by the High Court under sub Section 1 of Section 4A," the Court further noted..However, Court placed reliance on a decision of a coordinate bench of the High Court in which it was held that an Additional District Judge who discharges identical judicial functions like that of a District Judge are not subordinate to a District Judge, and competent to consider and hear the matter under the said Act.But the Court clarified that an Additional District Judge cannot independently take up applications under the Act.It is only when an application is transferred by a District Judge to the Additional District Judge, then the Additional District Judge is competent to consider the said application as a Judge of a District Court and his competence cannot be challenged for want of authorisation under Section 4A. "It is only the District Judge who can receive the application under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and the District Judge by order in writing transfer the cases under the Guardians and Wards Act to the Court of a Regular Additional District Judge and as well as to the Court of Additional District Judge, First Track Court for disposal at any stage of the proceeding upon compliance of the requisite formalities." the single-Judge held..[Read Order]