The CJI, visibly annoyed by the repeated requests for postponement, remarked: “We have accommodated him for so much time. We have accommodated him twice. This is not fair to the Court.”
Photo: IANS
The Supreme Court on Thursday took a serious view of the Central government’s request to defer Friday’s (November 7) hearing in a batch of petitions — including one filed by the Madras Bar Association — challenging the constitutional validity of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, which had dissolved several appellate tribunals and transferred their functions to High Courts.
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, heading a Bench that also comprised Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi, voiced strong displeasure when Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, sought an adjournment on behalf of Attorney General R. Venkataramani, citing his engagement in an international arbitration.
Advertisement
The CJI, visibly annoyed by the repeated requests for postponement, remarked: “We have accommodated him for so much time. We have accommodated him twice. This is not fair to the Court.”
Advertisement
Expressing frustration at yet another request to push the matter further, CJI Gavai added: “If you want to keep it after November 24, you tell us frankly.”
CJI Gavai is due to retire on November 23, 2025, and will be succeeded by Chief Justice-designate Justice Surya Kant.
At the previous hearing on November 3, the Attorney General had urged that the constitutional challenge to the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, be referred to a larger Bench.
Questioning that suggestion, CJI Gavai had asked pointedly whether it was a “ploy” to avoid his Bench.
When ASG Bhati proposed that the matter be listed for Monday, November 10, the Chief Justice countered: “When do we write the judgment?”
He explained that the matter was specifically scheduled for Friday, November 7, so the Bench could work on the judgment over the weekend.
Noting that the Union government is represented by a “battery of competent law officers” before the Supreme Court, CJI Gavai questioned why another senior law officer could not argue the case in place of the Attorney General.
Having made its displeasure clear, the Bench decided to proceed with the hearing. It directed that senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing the Madras Bar Association, would argue the matter on Friday, November 7, while the Attorney General would be heard on Monday, November 10.
CJI Gavai also cautioned, “If he does not come, we will close the matter.”
Advertisement
