Hyderabad: Chief Justice Hima Kohli of the Telangana High Court Justice on Tuesday expressed disgust over attempts of the TS government, TS Advocate-General’s office and senior counsel Vedula Venkataramana to get the “benches of their choice” to hear a case filed by Andhra Pradesh farmers.
The farmers had challenged the TS decision to fully utilize the water of Krishna river for 100 per cent power generation. Venkataraman was arguing counsel for the farmers of Andhra Pradesh.
CJ Kohli observed that both the sides had made attempts of bench hunting.
Pointing out the steps taken by counsels for the petitioners to hear the case urgently, CJ criticised Venkataraman by recollecting the manner in which he approached the High Court by filing the writ petition in the registry and seeking a house motion on a Sunday.
When the registry found some technical errors in the writ petition, the petitioner took one whole day to rectify these errors. Then, without giving ample time to the registry to place the writ petition file before the CJ bench, senior counsel approached the division bench No. 2 comprising of Justice Ramachandra Rao and Justice Vinod Kumar and requested an urgent hearing.
Is this not “bench hunting,” asked CJ Kohli.
Disputes regarding inter-state river disputes are before the Chief Justice’s bench and certain matters pertaining to state re-organisation are before the division bench No. 2. There is an overlapping of subjects.
In this writ petition, two issues are raised — viz inter state water disputes as well as re-organisation issues. To take a decision under such circumstances, the registry should be given ample time. Without giving such time, counsel for the petitioners approached the division bench No. 2, seeking an urgent hearing. “This is not in good taste,” observed the CJ.
The CJ found fault with the charges made by the office of the Advocate-General of Telangana state towards the High Court judge and insisting on a takeover of the matter from the bench of Justice Ramachandra Rao. She questioned Advocate General B.S. Prasad as to how the roster could be decided by the AG office or the state government, whereas it was purely in the administrative jurisdiction of the High Court.
‘You should have told the bench that it was not your roster, because it involved an inter-state water dispute. If the concerned bench did not take cognizance or it was ignored, then you should have approached the Chief Justice. On the contrary, you have asked the judge to recuse from the hearing. How could you do it?”
“Are you of the opinion that we would recuse ourselves from the hearing as per your wishes and choices? How will you make allegations against a judge,” Chief Justice Kohli asked the AG.
Suggesting that a conflicting attitude be avoided, CJ said judges do not have any personal interest in any case or matters. CJ said it was unfortunate and added that a date will be fixed in one or two days to hear the case filed by the Andhra Pradesh farmers.
Before the observations of CJ Kohli, Prasad informed the CJ bench that as per the roster, the inter-state river dispute matters come under the CJ bench purview. Hence it should be heard by the CJ bench.
He informed the court that an interlocutory application has been filed before the CJ bench stating that Justice Ramachandra Rao is of Andhra origin. “In view of this, the writ petition filed by two farmers from Krishna district of Andhra Pradesh, seeking suspension of the GO.Rt.34, through which TS Govt is utilising the irrigation water for generating hydel power should not be allocated to the division bench No. 2.”
CJ directed the AG to withdraw the interlocutory application. Adhering to the directions of the CJ, the AG withdrew the plea.
After completion of arguments before the CJ bench, the advocate general and Venkataramana appeared before the division bench 2 comprising Justice Ramachandra Rao and Justice T. Vinod Kumar.
Venkataramana informed the bench that the TS government has filed an interlocutory application before the CJ bench, praying it to hear the writ petition as it dealt with inter-state water dispute; that Justice Ramachandra Rao hails from Andhra Pradesh and hence this writ petition should not be allocated to him for hearing.
Justice Ramachandra Rao expressed surprise on the developments which occurred before the CJ bench because this writ petition was partly heard on Monday by division bench No. 2. Further, he observed, “It is unbecoming on the part of the Telangana state government and the AG is taking such a stand. It amounts to ‘bench hunting’. This is in bad taste. If I may say so, such things are happening from the office of the advocate general.”
