Gujarat High Court orders Central government to appoint Presiding Officer to DRT Ahmedabad within 2 months

The Gujarat High Court last week directed the Central government to expeditiously complete the process for the appointment of a Presiding Officer (PO) to the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I (DRT-I), Ahmedabad [Nipun Praveen Singhvi v Union of India]..A division bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh J Shastri ordered that the direction be complied within two months from the date of the order."A Writ of Mandamus is issued directing the respondent to conclude the process for appointment of the Presiding Officer in DRT-I, Ahmedabad, expeditiously and at any rate within an outer limit of two months from today," the order said..In the interim, the bench directed the respondents to place additional charge of DRT-I on the PO for DRT-II. .The order was passed in a public interest litigation (PIL) petition which contended that the vacancy was causing great difficulty to litigants and advocates. .The petition stated that the vacancy was causing a serious violation of the rights of litigants whose cases were pending before the tribunal, and their access to justice was compromised.“The vacancy in DRT-I has led to violation of legal rights of representation to the bankers/lenders, borrowers, guarantors, and other stake holders,” the petition read.It had also submitted that the vacancy led to the overburdening of writ courts and thus, stood against the purpose for which tribunals were created..Since DRT-II was functional, the petitioners asserted that the vacancy in DRT-I was violative of litigants’ rights under Article 14 as it led to discrimination amongst those identically placed..The division bench, in this regard, emphasised that the right to speedy justice was enshrined under Article 21..The court also noted that the matter was adjourned thrice based on the statement of Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Devang Vyas that the process of appointment was underway, however the assurance never crystallised."Though this matter has seen two subsequent dates i.e. 17.6.2022 and 20.6.2022, till date, the assurance given to this Court has not crystallized by way of any such steps having been taken or order having been issued", the Court said.Additionally, since the counsel appearing for the Central government failed to give a concrete response as to whether they were ready to pass an order or issue office memorandum for an in-charge arrangement, the Court proceeded to pass the order..Advocates Vishal J Dave and Hiral U Mehta appeared for the petitioner, while advocate Siddharth Dave appeared for the respondent..[Read Order].Gujarat High Court issues notice in plea for appointment of Presiding Officer in DRT Ahmedabad