Punjab and Haryana High Court intervenes after DRT dismisses plea citing lack of stenographers

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday said that the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) cannot dismiss any application on account of shortage of stenographers and typists [Sarabjit Singh Company and another v Debts Recovery Tribunal III and others]..A Division Bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Sumeet Goel stressed that the presiding officer of DRT must instead raise the issue with the competent authority.“We are of the considered view that the dismissal of the application(s) on account of shortage of stenographers and typists is unwarranted and the applications ought to have been heard and decided on merits. In the event of shortage of infrastructure and staff, the Presiding Officer ought to have raised the issue with the competent authority and it could not be the reason for dismissal of the application,” the Court said..It was hearing a petition moved by Sarabjit Singh Company against DRT-III Chandigarh’s orders rejecting the application seeking a stay on taking of physical possession of the secured asset by a bank and the application for advancing the hearing of their case.Senior Advocate DS Patwalia representing the petitioner submitted that one of the applications was erroneously dismissed on the ground that the board was heavy and there was acute shortage of stenographers and efficient typists in the tribunal..Seeking an interim relief, it was submitted that the petitioner was ready to make the entire payment as sought by the bank. The counsel representing the Bank of India told the Court that the petitioner would not be dispossessed from the secured asset till February 28..Considering that applications could not have been dismissed due to lack of staff, the Court set aside the orders passed by DRT-III Chandigarh and allowed the petition. “The matter is remanded back to the DRT-III, Chandigarh to decide the applications afresh expeditiously in accordance with law while considering the afore-noted proposal,” it ordered..Taking note of the shortage of the stenographers and typists at the DRT, the Court recorded the Union government’s assurance that in case the presiding officer sends a requisition with regard to the requirement of staff, the same would be addressed at the earliest. “The presiding officer is requested to send the requisition of staff forthwith to the Government of India with a copy to learned Addl. Solicitor General of India,” the Court ordered..Senior Advocate DS Patwalia with advocate Gaurav Rana appeared for the petitioners.Advocate Rajiv Joshi represented the bank. Senior Deputy Advocate General Aftab Singh Khara represented the State of Punjab.Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain with Senior Panel Counsel Dheeraj Jain and Advocate Neha Dalal represented the Union of India..[Read Judgment]