Thursday, 09 MAY 2024 | PNS | NAINITAL
In a verbal order, a division bench of Uttarakhand High Court (HC) has said that a bench of HC should be set up at Indian Drugs and Pharmaceutical Limited (IDPL) land in Rishikesh. The division bench comprising the Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Rakesh Thapliyal made an observation regarding HC bench in Rishikesh while hearing petitions on IDPL on Wednesday. The State government has filed a special appeal in the IDPL case and the chief secretary Radha Raturi appeared before the court via video conferencing. While dictating the order, the chief justice said that the decision to shift the HC to Gaulapar area in Haldwani is wrong and 850 acres of land in IDPL Rishikesh is proper for setting up the HC bench. The court also observed that since 70 per cent of the cases in HC are from Garhwal region, a bench of HC in IDPL Rishikesh would be ideal to deal with their cases and for the rest 30 per cent cases, the HC in Nainital is appropriate.
The observation of the HC stirred the lawyers who registered their strong protest and demanded the order be taken back. A delegation of lawyers led by president of Bar Association, D S Rawat requested the court to take back its order following which CJ Bahri and Justice Thapliyal heard their plea. The Bar Association president also objected to the deployment of a huge police force in the court premises.
CJ Bahri said that the proposal of shifting HC from Nainital had come from the side of lawyers in the past. She said that land earmarked in Gaulapar in Haldwani is forest land and shifting court there would result in cutting of many trees. The CJ said that land is available in IDPL Rishikesh for a HC bench and it is suitable for petitioners of Garhwal.
Justice Thapliyal said that there are many inconveniences for HC to continue from Nainital since there is land constraint for expansion.
The president of Bar Association Rawat said that the Bar is against the opening of a bench of HC. He said that setting up a new bench is impractical for a small state like Uttarakhand. After hearing the case, the HC asked the Bar Association to inform the court about a place where expansion of HC is possible even after 50 years.
