We pray to God: Punjab & Haryana High Court urges UT admin to address space crunch in court

Facing a space crunch and opposition to its expansion over heritage and environmental concerns, the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a judicial order literally prayed to God for the Union of Territory (UT) of Chandigarh to take a pragmatic view of the situation. [Vinod Dhattewal and others v. Union of India and others].The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry in the order dated August 13 noted that against its sanctioned strength of 85, the High Court only has 69 operational rooms."This dissuades the High Court from working full strength. We thus beseech the U.T. Chandigarh Administration to take a pragmatic view and allow the High Court to expand infrastructurally, by giving approval to the Holistic Plan, be it restrictively.".The Court thus directed the Chandigarh administration to explore the possibility of allotting two floors of its erstwhile secretariat for housing the administrative branches of the High Court. The UT offices have been shifted out of the secretariat to a new building.Urging the UT administration to adopt a facilitative stance in the matters, the Court stressed that requirements or constraints of the High Court are those of the administration as well."It goes without saying that judiciary is the third pillar of democracy which can function effectively only when the other two pillars (Executive and Legislature) work in tandem with judiciary. The edifice of democracy will crumble if any of the three pillars is weakened. We hope, expect and pray to God that U.T. Chandigarh Administration shall rise to the occasion to ameliorate the genuine grievance of the High Court of acute shortage of space," the Court said..We hope, expect and pray to God that U.T. Chandigarh Administration shall rise to the occasion to ameliorate the genuine grievance of the High Court of acute shortage of space.Punjab and Haryana High Court.The High Court, which is located in Sector 1 of Chandigarh, falls within the catchment area of Sukhna Lake. It is also a heritage building, making it difficult for the authorities to expand at the present location. The High Court building is part of the Chandigarh Capitol Complex, which has UNESCO World Heritage status. For many years, the Court on the judicial side has been hearing this case related to the lack of infrastructure at its premises..In the latest development, the UT administration objected to the environmental clearance for the Court’s proposal to have a new High Court building in the same IT Park area. In the order passed after the last hearing, the Court had asked the UT authorities to produce documents regarding the restrictions imposed by the Wildlife Board in the IT Park area.It had also sought:Documentary proof of environmental objections qua IT Park area.Sanction order issued by UT administration and NOC documents issued by environmental authorities qua Lalit Hotel which is located in the IT Park area..Though there is a proposal to shift the High Court to Sarangpur, the Court has said the same may not be practical since traffic to the village is restricted and often affected by congestion at the PGIMER square.The Court on August 1 had asked the High Court Bar Association to hold a meeting with the competent authorities of the Chandigarh administration to discuss the issue of an alternative site for the High Court campus or a holistic plan earlier proposed for the existing premises..On August 13, the Court was told that the meeting remained inconclusive and further deliberations are scheduled to be held on August 20. The matter will be heard next on August 22.Meanwhile, the Court has directed the UT administration to ensure that a fire safety certificate is issued by Chandigarh Municipal Corporation within a week for the Sector 17 building already handed over to the High Court..Senior Advocate Aashish Chopra, along with Advocates Varun Aryan Sharma, Abhijeet Chaudhary, Raman Walia, Nitika Sharma and RS Randhawa appeared for various petitioners and applicants.Additional Solicitor General of India Satya Pal Jain and Senior Panel Counsel Dheeraj Jain and Arun Gosain appeared for the Central government.Senior Advocate Rupinder S Khosla and Advocates Yogender Verma, SS Narula, Nilesh Bhardwaj and Gagandeep Jammu appeared for the High Court Bar Association.Additional Advocate General Deepak Balyan appeared for the State of Haryana.Senior Advocate Amit Jhanji and Advocate Jaivir S Chandail represented the UT administration.Advocate Tanu Bedi appeared as amicus curiae in one of the matters along with Advocate Arshdeep Kaur.Senior Advocates Kanwaljit Singh and Gaurav Chopra and Advocates Brijeshwar Singh Kanwar, Muskan Sharma, Sandeep Khunger, KDS Hooda and Rajeev Anand appeared for various respondents..[Read Order]