Gauhati High Court dismisses challenge to Chief Justice’s decision to transfer petitions from Itanagar Bench

The Gauhati High Court recently dismissed a petition challenging the Chief Justice’s administrative decision to transfer a batch of petitions in a land acquisition case to its Principal Seat at Guwahati from the Itanagar Bench. [Shri Tari Hai vs The Gauhati High Court].The division bench of Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund also rejected a request for the Chief Justice’s recusal from the matter. The recusal had been sought since the Chief Justice’s administrative decision was under challenge. .Pertinently, the transfer of the petitions in the land acquisition case took place in March 2022 when Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia (now a Supreme Court judge) was the High Court Chief Justice. Justice Sandeep Mehta took oath as Chief Justice of the High Court only on February 15 this year..While rejecting the plea for Chief Justice Mehta's recusal in the present matter, the Court noted that the request was flawed and fallacious. It explained that if such a request is accepted, neither the Chief Justice nor any other judge could hear any petition involving a service dispute of any judicial officer, particularly when High Court would be a party.“If the Latin maxim nemo judex in causa sua [No man shall be Judge in his own cause] were to be applied, service matters of Judicial Officers may not be heard in the same High Court,” the Court said. .The Court also rejected an argument that the transfer of the petitions from Itanagar amounted to lowering the dignity of the Itanagar Permenant Bench.“We feel that the said submission is also unacceptable and untenable on the face of the record,” the Court said.It added that the move cannot be construed to imply that the decision taken by Chief Justice was "a measure of casting aspersion on competence/integrity of the Judges at the Itanagar Permanent Bench.".It reasoned that on many occasions, the Chief Justice is required to transfer the files or cases as an “appropriate Division Bench” cannot be constituted at Itanagar to hear the appeals against orders passed by a single judge.“Would such a decision mean that the jurisdiction of the Itanagar Permanent Bench is being usurped or that the decision casts a shadow on the competence or integrity of the Presiding Judges at the Itanagar Permanent Bench?” it asked.While answering the question in negative, the Court said the projection by counsel representing the petitioner was flawed and had no legs to stand.It also observed that after establishment of the Itanagar Permanent Bench in 2007, a total of about 87 files have been transferred to the Principal Seat at Guwahati..The Court went on to underscore that each judge of the Gauhati High Court is, for all practical purposes, a judge of the Principal Seat as well as its three outlying benches. It added that the stationing of judges at one bench or another was made “purely for the purpose of drawing salary from the State and not for any other purpose whatsoever.".The Court further found that in this case, the petitions were transferred as a respondent (General Manager of NHPC) in the case had its office in Assam.“The said writ petition was fit to be entertained in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court. The order, whereby ... all similar petitions were directed to be transferred to Guwahati, was evidently passed so as to ensure uniformity in decision,” the order added. The Court also highlighted that its Principal Seat and outlying Benches in Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Nagaland now allowed hybrid hearings. Thus, lawyers could not feign any difficulty in addressing the bench at Guwahati from Itanagar, the Court said. .“In a recent direction issued by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, all High Courts have been directed to provide a virtual hearing link in the daily cause list. Thus, the counsel desirous to address the Court virtually can take recourse of the said facility thereby, alleviating the projected difficulties of travelling and additional expenditure," the judges said. .The Court proceeded to dismissed the plea against the transfer of the petitions to Guwahati. .Advocate T Pertin represented three individual petitioners. Senior Standing Counsel UK Nair and advocate HK Das represented the Gauhati High Court. Advocate TT Tara represented the Bar Association of Gauhati High Court Itanagar Bench.[Read Judgment]