People have very little faith in judicial system; will lose that too if courts dismiss everything on technicalities: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Friday took strong exception to the what it termed as attempt by the Central government to delay a case on the basis of technicalities (Kitex Garments Limited v. State of Kerala)..Single-judge Justice PB Suresh Kumar, who had previously adjourned the matter several times owing to delay by the government in filing statements, strongly berated the government for arguing on technicalities when the Court was ready to pass orders. The Court also said that people's faith in judicial system is very low and even that will be lost, if matters are delayed or dismissed on technical grounds."If we start dismissing on technicalities, people will lose their faith in this system. Already they have very little faith and we will lose that too.".The Court was hearing a plea by Kitex Garments Limited seeking to administer the second dose of COVID vaccine to its employees without waiting for the 84-day time gap between two doses It was their argument that have already purchased sufficient stock of the vaccine..Central government counsel Dayasindhu Shreehari argued that the petition shouldn't be entertained as none of the employees had approached the government or the Court directly with any grievance regarding the gap between the doses."I am only saying no one has come to the government and they should have done so before approaching the Court for a mandamus. We would have had the expert body consider the matter," Shreehari argued..Justice Kumar noted that the government and expert body have already allowed persons to take the vaccine without waiting for the 84-day gap in cases where people had to abroad for employment or studies and more recently for participating in the Tokyo Olympics. Therefore, the Court said that if the government would actually consider the requests of the petitioner and their employees and pass orders expeditiously, the Court would have no hesitation in disposing of the matter. "l'll repose absolute confidence in the government and pass orders immediately. But something should happen. This case keeps getting delayed and this shouldn't be said just to delay it further and throw a spanner in the works," the judge said..The Court then went on to remark that the practice of delaying cases on technicalities is detrimental to justice delivery system. "Ultimately the system is there to render justice to people. Lawyers will find umpteen reasons to delay a case, you'll find some reason or technicality. I am not blaming lawyers because you are paid by somebody else for that purpose but whether all these contentions have to be accepted by court or not, you cannot say.".The Court observed that law must evolve to achieve the goal of rendering justice to the all. "We have delayed and dismissed hundreds of writ petitions before because of such technical things. Law will have to evolve and develop and you will have to ensure the purpose of the institution, which is ultimately to render justice, not to uphold technicalities," it remarked..Justice Kumar further said that several of the petitions that have come up for consideration before him can be delayed and dismissed on technicalities but if he did so, the institution itself would fail. "If I dismiss all the writs on technicalities, this institution would fail. Conventional lawyers are saying that this Court is encouraging cases without proper pleas. So many people are saying this and it is coming to my ear also," the judge said..However, Justice Kumar maintained that matters should not always be dismissed on technicalities so that people's faith in judicial system is not lost completely. "But if start dismissing on technicalities, people will lose their faith in this system. Already they have very little faith and we will lose that too.".With regard to the present plea, the Court observed that the petitioner has spent ₹1.5 crore and bought vaccines for over 15,000 of their employees but, "because of government's red-tapism, no decision has been made yet".The Court had made a similar observation a few days ago in the same matter when the government counsel asked for a few more weeks' time to submit a response which was denied by the Court.The Court reiterated that it shouldn't delay the matter which could possibly affect millions of people who are waiting to receive the second dose and able to pay for it..The Court also remarked that the main point to be decided is whether a citizen can choose between receiving maximum protection from the virus by waiting for 84 days as the government prescribes or receive early protection by getting the second dose at an earlier date. "In the 84 days in between doses, a person is more likely to get infected than someone who has both doses. If it's a person who feels like there is higher risk of them getting infected and they pay for the vaccine, can they not choose early protection over maximum protection?"