Kerala High Court slams State for pathetic, casual response to court proceedings

The Kerala High Court recently criticized the State government's casual approach in responding to a long-pending petition challenging the nationalization of the Ernakulam-Muvattupuzha route under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988..Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh noted that while the petition had been pending since 2018, the State had yet to file its counter in the matter, which has prolonged the disposal of the case. "This Court deprecates in the strongest manner the conduct of the State Government in taking the Court proceedings too casually and callously," Justice Singh said.The judge went on to note that this is not an isolated instance and that the State's casual conduct has led to delays in the disposal of several cases. "This Court is at pains to note the pathetic casual approach in Court proceedings and disrespect of the State Government to the Court and Court proceedings. In no case is the counter affidavit filed on time. The Government Counsel representing the State Government takes one adjournment after another on one pretext or the other for filing the counter affidavit in a matter, which results in a long pendency of the cases in the Court," the Court said. .The petition before the Court had been filed by PM Surendran and MP Prasad (petitioners). The petitioners had challenged the State government's decision to approve a scheme to nationalize the Ernakulam-Muvattupuzha route under Section 102 (cancellation or modification of scheme) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.In an earlier order passed on June 11, the Court had expressed dismay over the State's failure to file a response to this petition. It proceeded to direct the Principal Secretary of the Transport Department to appear before the court with the relevant records.However, the Secretary failed to appear in the next hearing on June 19 and instead sought an exemption through the government's counsel..The Court minced no words in expressing its displeasure at such a turn of events. The judge pointed out that if the principal secretary was unable to appear, another person in charge of the State Transport Department should have appeared before the Court instead. "This callous and casual approach of the State Government does not augur well in the dispensation of justice and would only show disrespect to the High Court, the highest Court in the State," the Court added. .The Court eventually allowed the exemption request but warned that an officer from the State Transport Department must be present for the next hearing, along with the documents relevant to the case. The Court said that contempt proceedings would be initiated against the officer responsible and that costs of ₹50,000 would also be imposed if a counter affidavit is not filed before the next hearing..The Court proceeded to schedule the next hearing of the matter on July 4, 2024..The petitioners were represented by advocate P Deepak. Government Pleader Santhosh Kumar P appeared for the state..[Read Order]