The Rajasthan High Court stays a single judge’s order imposing separation of ‘chaotic’ common causes

In a recent development, after a single judge admonished the registry for preparing a 145-page long ‘common cause list’, a Division Bench has placed an interim stay on the earlier direction of segregating the list as Cause list (I) And Cause list (II). According to the observations of the single court, these lists had to contain specific entries in the respective dockets indicating whether it was the routine list of the alternate court or the supplementary docket of the court that was not sitting.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati And Justice Munnuri Laxman noted that since the matter requires careful consideration, it should be re-notified in the second week of July 2024. The court explained that it could not currently deal with the case in detail due to time constraints.

“…In the meantime, the effect and effect of the order dated March 27, 2024, to the extent that the directions in paragraph 6 remain in force….”the court notes in the judgment.

The Division Bench also clarified that it is open to the Registry to refer to the Chief Justice the issue mentioned by the Single Judge which merits consideration.

The senior counsel appearing before the appellate court had argued that only the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is in charge of the list. As per Rule 73 of the Rules of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan 1952 and Section 44 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, preparation of docket and other administrative matters are dealt with by the Registry based on the instructions of the Chief Justice of the Court, he argued.

The issues of listing and allotment of roll lists to the alternate Benches and additional roll lists to a Bench are issues falling directly under the aforesaid laws, with the Chief Justice having the final say, counsel for the appellant further submitted.

Counsel also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand 1998(1) SCC 1 to underline that it is the prerogative of the Chief Justice to see which cases a judge should hear and which judges a division will form. Bench, and what work those benches will do.

Background

The single jury hearing took place on March 27 Judge Arun Monga withdrew the registry because the cause list on that day was unclear and contained a staggering number of 1,609 cases. On that occasion, Judge Monga also mentioned that the alternative way of indicating cases by using the terms Cause List (A) and (B) can also be used instead of Cause list (I) And Cause list (II). Each of these measures would prevent the confusion that arises if the cause lists are combined, the court believed at the time.

In certain cases, the court stated that some counsel had strongly urged it to give preference to their respective cases by mentioning them. The court noted that during the hearing of 1,609 cases, this madness had consumed a large portion of the court’s time before returning to actual court work.

Although the court noted that navigating the “chaotic” list of causes created a “labyrinthine situation” akin to “scrambling an uncoded egg,” the clerk responded that such a practice of publishing a common cause list is a common practice.

The court had made these observations in a case where none had appeared for the suspects. The court was of the view that the non-appearance of the defendant side could possibly be attributed to their uncertainty as to which case would be taken up after the mention was over, given the long docket.

For appellant: Dr. Sachin Acharya, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr Chayan Bothra and Mr Samyak Dala

Case title: The High Court for Rajasthan, through the Registrar General v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Case number: DB spl. Appl. Written No. 480/2024

Click here to read/download the order