In a judicial order, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi of the Allahabad High Court recently recorded how exhausting it can be for a judge to deal with a long list of cases in a single day..After hearing a plea on February 24 against an order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), the judge, instead of passing an immediate order, reserved the verdict with the following comment,"Since I am feeling hungry, tired and physically incapacitated to dictate the judgment, the judgment is reserved.".Since I am feeling hungry, tired and physically incapacitated to dictate the judgment, the judgment is reserved.Justice Subhash Vidyarthi .The Court recorded that it had commenced the hearing of the matter at 4.15 pm and concluded it at 7:10 pm. It also disclosed the reason for hearing the matter beyond working hours.In August 2025, the Supreme Court had urged the High Court to decide the petition as early as possible, preferably within six months. The period of six months expired on February 24."Today there were 92 fresh matters, 101 regular matters, 39 fresh misc. applications and three matters listed in the additional/unlisted list-I, II and III. Only fresh cases upto serial number 29 could be heard today. However, keeping in view the order passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court hearing of this matter was commenced at 4.15 p.m. and it has concluded at 7.10 p.m," the judge wrote..Pertinently, a co-ordinate Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia in May 2025 had aside the order passed by DRT after noting a submission that it was passed without hearing the petitioner."Matter is remanded to the DRT to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner," the judge had said, without discussing merits of the case.However, the Supreme Court in August 2025 remanded the matter to the High Court for a fresh decision. The top court had found a breach of natural justice in the case since no notice had been issued to the borrower."There being breach of natural justice, the order dated 26th May, 2025 cannot sustain. It stands set aside. This would result in revival of the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the High Court. The High Court is requested to decide the said petition on its own merits as early as possible and, subject to its convenience, preferably within six months," the Supreme Court said..The matter then came for fresh consideration before Justice Vidyarthi..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
