Courts should not routinely summon government officials; should avoid comments on their attire: Central government draft SOP

Comments by judges on the dress or social background of government officials asked to appear in courts should be avoided, a draft standard operating procedure (SOP) submitted by the Central government before the Supreme Court said.Since government officials are not officers of the court, there should be no objection to them appearing in their work dress as long as the same is not unprofessional, the SOP added."Comments on the dress/physical appearance/educational and social background of the government official appearing before of the Court should be refrained."The SOP was submitted in a case relating to summoning of two government official by the Allahabad High Court for contempt of court.The draft SOP contains a slew of guidelines regarding the appearance of such officials in court proceedings involving government litigation. This includes their appearances in contempt of court cases. The SOP states that the norms should be made applicable to all such court proceedings in both the higher and the subordinate judiciary.The aim is to create a more congenial and conducive environment between the judiciary and the government, to improve the overall quality of government compliance with judicial orders and to minimise any scope for contempt of court.The SOP also aims to contribute significantly to saving the time and resources of both the courts and the government by allowing for the appearance of government officials through video conferencing. .Notably, the SOP has suggested that the personal appearance of public officials in court proceedings should be called for only in exceptional cases and not as a matter of routine. Courts should practice restraint while summoning such officials in cases, including in writ proceedings, public interest litigation and contempt cases, the draft SOP said. "In exceptional circumstances wherein there is no option other than the concerned government official to be present in person in the court, due notice for in-person appearance, giving sufficient time for such appearance, must be served in advance to such official," it added. .These rules should be applicable even in cases where officials pass quasi-judicial orders in their official capacity. Any appeal against such orders should be limited to their legality, the guidelines further said..The SOP has also suggested that contempt of court proceedings against officials can only lie with respect to enforceable orders and not for matters lying in the executive domain, merely to ensure a particular outcome.Moreover, courts should not initiate contempt of court proceedings where the action in question is not wilful..Before the initiation of contempt of court proceedings, prayers for review on behalf of the government may be entertained by higher courts on the law points allegedly not considered earlier, it has been added.Further, the outcome of contempt of court proceedings is to be kept in abeyance at the lower court level till the review is decided, the draft SOP has suggested.Pertinently, the SOP has emphasised that judges should not ideally sit on contempt proceedings relating to their own orders..Another guideline suggested is that sufficient time should be granted for compliance with judicial orders involving policy matters, after considering the government's stand in such matters. .[Read draft SOP]