The Supreme Court is likely to reassess whether or not it will resume physical hearing but any decision on the same will be arrived at only after taking into account the opinion of medical experts. .This position emerged from remarks made by two different Benches during the court proceedings on Wednesday. .A Bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan when hearing the case concerning reservation for Maratha caste under the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act stated:."We intend not to begin hearing (of Maratha reservation case) on January 25. We will keep the matter to pass directions after 2 weeks so that we know from when we start the physical hearing. We can fix a date (for final hearing) then.".The remarks were made after Senior Counsel Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the Maharashtra government urged the Court to conduct physical hearing for this case "We are finding it difficult to prepare for the case virtually with clients in Mumbai. There is an interim order against Maharashtra which is absolute. Please hold physical hearing," he said. .The Court will now take up the matter on February 5 by which time there could be clarity on whether the Supreme Court will revert to physical functioning. .Meanwhile, a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde said that while the Supreme Court is keen to revert to normal functioning, the same will not be done without an opinion from medical experts. The Bench was hearing a plea filed by some lawyers challenging the January 14 decision of the Delhi High Court to commence physical hearing in High Court and lower courts in Delhi.During the hearing of the matter, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh brought up the topic of resumption of physical hearings at the Supreme Court. To his query on when the same would happen, CJI Bobde replied,"We also want to come to back to action like we did before. But not without medical opinion on board.".We also want to come to back to action like we did before. But not without medical opinion on board.CJI SA Bobde.Singh then sought to highlight the problems faced by the Bar due to the closure of courts. CJI Bobde assured him,"We know the problems of the Bar. We have been meeting them over the past nine months.".The top court has been functioning via video conference since March 23, 2020, when it shut due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The top court had issued a circular on March 23 suspending entry of lawyers and litigants to the court premises and directing that only urgent cases will be taken up for hearing through video conferencing.The video conferencing is conducted by the court through ‘Vidyo app’ which can be downloaded on mobile phones and desktop..The Court had attempted to resume physical hearing in September 2020 but with little success. It had, in fact, modified the Court rooms and installed infrastructure to commence physical hearing in a limited way but the same was met with lukewarm response from the Bar. .Note: The earlier version of the story incorrectly mentioned that a decision on physical hearing will be taken by January 25. The error is regretted.
The Supreme Court is likely to reassess whether or not it will resume physical hearing but any decision on the same will be arrived at only after taking into account the opinion of medical experts. .This position emerged from remarks made by two different Benches during the court proceedings on Wednesday. .A Bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan when hearing the case concerning reservation for Maratha caste under the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act stated:."We intend not to begin hearing (of Maratha reservation case) on January 25. We will keep the matter to pass directions after 2 weeks so that we know from when we start the physical hearing. We can fix a date (for final hearing) then.".The remarks were made after Senior Counsel Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the Maharashtra government urged the Court to conduct physical hearing for this case "We are finding it difficult to prepare for the case virtually with clients in Mumbai. There is an interim order against Maharashtra which is absolute. Please hold physical hearing," he said. .The Court will now take up the matter on February 5 by which time there could be clarity on whether the Supreme Court will revert to physical functioning. .Meanwhile, a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde said that while the Supreme Court is keen to revert to normal functioning, the same will not be done without an opinion from medical experts. The Bench was hearing a plea filed by some lawyers challenging the January 14 decision of the Delhi High Court to commence physical hearing in High Court and lower courts in Delhi.During the hearing of the matter, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh brought up the topic of resumption of physical hearings at the Supreme Court. To his query on when the same would happen, CJI Bobde replied,"We also want to come to back to action like we did before. But not without medical opinion on board.".We also want to come to back to action like we did before. But not without medical opinion on board.CJI SA Bobde.Singh then sought to highlight the problems faced by the Bar due to the closure of courts. CJI Bobde assured him,"We know the problems of the Bar. We have been meeting them over the past nine months.".The top court has been functioning via video conference since March 23, 2020, when it shut due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The top court had issued a circular on March 23 suspending entry of lawyers and litigants to the court premises and directing that only urgent cases will be taken up for hearing through video conferencing.The video conferencing is conducted by the court through ‘Vidyo app’ which can be downloaded on mobile phones and desktop..The Court had attempted to resume physical hearing in September 2020 but with little success. It had, in fact, modified the Court rooms and installed infrastructure to commence physical hearing in a limited way but the same was met with lukewarm response from the Bar. .Note: The earlier version of the story incorrectly mentioned that a decision on physical hearing will be taken by January 25. The error is regretted.