Page 60 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

A118 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

complaints and second appeals from applicants directly which are now pending
because of the lack of details about the CPIOs,” the letter said.
The Centre in October last year had written to the CIC detailing the steps
needed for transitioning from the J & K RTI Act, 2009 to the Centre’s RTI Act,
2005. All appeals and complaints pending before the J&K Information Commis-
sion were set to be transferred to the CIC, according to the action plan prepared
by the DoPT and shared with CIC.
Questioning the delay in the transition, particularly when the Centre has
formally extended the jurisdiction of the CIC to Jammu and Kashmir, transpar-
ency activist Venkatesh Nayak said while the CIC and DoPT had been pushing
for the transfer of cases to the Central Body, the local administration had stalled
the process by approaching the Court, and appointing a committee to look into
the process. “There was already a plan in place so there should not have been
any delay”
[Source : The Economic Times, New Delhi, dated 30-4-2020]
Revert to Open Court hearing after lockdown
At a time when Courts are turning to virtual hearings to keep the wheels
of justice moving during the lockdown, the Bar Council of India (BCI) expressed
reservations over it becoming the norm.
The Statutory Body for Advocates in the country cautioned that virtual
hearings could never replace Open Court hearings and urged the Chief Justice of
India to revert to the latter once the lockdown ended.
“If such practice was encouraged and allowed to continue, there was not
an iota of doubt that more than 95% of the Advocates of the country would be-
come brief less and work less and the practice of law would be confined to a
limited group of Lawyers and Justice delivery would be badly affected,” BCI
Chairman Manan Mishra said in a letter addressed to CJI. S.A. Bobde on
28-4-2020.
Manan’s letter argued that resorting to technology and video conference
hearings in times of a pandemic could be the “need of the hour” but termed as
“impractical” the notion that it should be extended once the lockdown ended.
The BCI also wanted the Courts to explore ways in which physical hearings
could be conducted in case the lockdown got extended, where social distancing
could be maintained yet Courts too functioned.
The letter countered those advocating a greater say for virtual hearings
in Court proceedings and said many Lawyers, retired Judges “and even some
sitting Judges of the Supreme Court were oblivious to the ground realities of
India. They were thinking on such a tangent and making such utopian plans,
which was as if, they were planning upon implementing and executing such
ideas for a fully developed nation like UK, USA, or in some other country other
than India.”
Pointing out that Justice should be able to permeate the rural as well as
urban areas, the BCI Chairman argued that technology could at best help in Jus-
tice delivery system but “to propose to have Court proceedings being heard and
decided only on video with Judge and two party concerned all sitting at different
places” could not be accepted.
[Source : The Times of India, New Delhi, dated 30-4-2020]
_______
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  60