Anand Vaid Vs Preety Vaid Vs Ors July 29

$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3227/2020
MR. ANAND VAID ..... Petitioner

Through: Mr. Ankur Mahindro, Advocate with
Mr. Ankush Satija and Ms. Sanjoli Mehrotra,
Advocates alongwith petitioner-in-person
versus
MS. PREETY VAID & ORS. ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Advocate with Mr.
Naman Jain, Advocate for High Court of Delhi
Mr. Mohit Mathur, President, DHCBA and Mr.
Abhijat, Secretary, DHCBA with Mr. Shaashwat
Jindal and Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Advocates for
DHCBA
Mr. Anupam Srivastava, ASC for GNCTD with
Mr. Dhairya Gupta, Advocate for R-4 & R-5
Mr. Reetesh Singh, OSD (Examination for DHJS
and DJS, Member Secretary- State Court
Management System Committee (SCMSC),
Litigation and Rules)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
ORDER
% 29.07.2020
HEARD THROUGH VIDEOCONFERENCING
CM. 15113/2020 (on b/o Delhi High Court Bar Association for
impleadment)
1. A Status Report dated 24.07.2020, has been filed by the Delhi

Government through the Additional Secretary (Law & Justice), Government
W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 1 of 4

of NCT of Delhi. The said Status Report seeks to rely on an order dated
10.07.2020, issued by the Finance Department, Government of Delhi to state
that for incurring expenditures not included in paras 2 and 3 of the said order
and have financial implications above Rs.1.00 crore, relaxation has to be
solicited from the Council of Ministers.
2. Relying on the said order, Mr. Anupam Srivastava, learned ASC for
the GNCTD states that the two urgent proposals forwarded by the District
Court to the Delhi Government relating to procurement of manual attached
storage and routers, both essential for conducting Virtual Courts, have not
been cleared as the financial implications of the said proposals is above
Rs.1.00 crore. Instead, the matter has to be placed before the Council of
Ministers for according appropriate sanction.
3. On enquiring from Mr. Reetesh Singh, OSD (Examination) and
Mr.Virender Kumar Bansal, Chairman, Centralised Computer Committee,
District Court as to whether the Delhi Government is required to release
additional funds besides the budget already allocated to the District Courts
for disbursing amounts for the aforesaid two proposals, we are informed that
both the said proposals fall under the head of non-plan expenditure for
which funds are already available with the District Courts and only a formal
approval for spending money on the aforesaid proposals is required from the
Delhi Government.
4. In view of the above submission, we have requested Mr Srivastava,
learned ASC, to clarify as to how would the order dated 10.07.2020 apply to
the aforesaid proposals. In fact, the matter was passed over to await the
presence of the Secretary (Finance), Delhi Government to assist the court on
this aspect. However, on the second call Mr. Srivastava, learned ASC states
W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 2 of 4

that Secretary (Finance) is presently held up in a meeting with the Speaker
of the Legislative Assembly and requests that orders may be deferred till the
next date.
5. Mr. Mohit Mathur, President, DHCBA and Mr. Abhijat, Secretary,
DHCBA state in unison that the legal community and the litigants are facing
great difficulty in participating virtually in matters listed before the Judges
of the District Courts as in the absence of adequate bandwidth, the Judges
are having to resort to using the software of CISCO Webex, which is a free
app that provides a slot of 40 minutes at one time and halfway through the
arguments, counsels get automatically delinked. The whole process of re-
linking has to be taken for arguments to continue, which causes considerable
disruptions and delays in the hearing. They submit that the Delhi
Government be called upon to take expeditious steps to clear the pending
proposals referred to hereinabove, to provide seamless hearing in virtual
courts.
6. We may note that all the pending proposals in question relating to the
District Courts have been pending at the end of the Delhi Government since
the year 2018. It is a different matter that due to the COVID-19 pandemic
situation that occurred in March, 2020, courts have had to resort to virtual
hearings. The need of the hour is to provide adequate bandwidth, Network
attached storage and Routers, etc., to facilitate conducting virtual courts.
However, lawyers, litigants and the subordinate judiciary are being
inconvenienced due to the stand now sought to be taken by the Delhi
Government.
7. At the request of Mr. Srivastava, learned ASC, list on 31.07.2020, to
await the presence of the Secretary (Finance). Delhi Government. It is also
W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 3 of 4

directed that henceforth, any correspondence exchanged between the District
Judge (Headquarters) and the Delhi Government shall be preferably
conducted electronically to save precious time and to ensure expeditious
disposal of pending issues.
8. As we are informed that the Law Minister, Delhi Government, is in
the process of preparing a note on the pending proposal for being placed
before the Council of Ministers, this order shall be brought to his notice
today itself for him to apprise the Council of Ministers as well.
HIMA KOHLI, J
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
JULY 29, 2020
hsk
W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 4 of 4

Anand Vaid Vs Preety Vaid Vs Ors July 29

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anand Vaid Vs Preety Vaid Vs Ors July 29

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anand Vaid Vs Preety Vaid Vs Ors July 29

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

$~8

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

MR. ANAND VAID ..... Petitioner

MS. PREETY VAID & ORS. ..... Respondents

1. A Status Report dated 24.07.2020, has been filed by the Delhi

W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 1 of 4

W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 2 of 4

W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 3 of 4

W.P.(C) 3227/2020 Page 4 of 4

You might also like