Give security to litigants, lawyers: Orissa HC.

Source – thehindu.com

The Orissa High Court on Tuesday ordered the Superintendent of Police of Sambalpur district to provide adequate security to the litigants and advocates who approach the local district and sessions court for their case hearing.

Adjudicating on a PIL filed by advocate Shivsankar Mohanty, a Division Bench headed by Chief Justice K.S. Jhaveri passed the order on Tuesday.

Mr. Mohanty said that the order assumes significance in view of the fact that the agitating lawyers of Sambalpur are meeting on Wednesday to chalk out their next course of action.

In 2018, Mr. Mohanty had filed the PIL with a prayer seeking the High Court’s intervention in facilitating the litigants and the “willing” advocates to argue their cases in the district court. He had pointed out in his petition that the lawyers of Sambalpur Bar Association were on a strike since September 2018 and were preventing the district judge and other judicial officers from attending the courts. The protesting lawyers had also paralysed the functioning at all the judicial and revenue courts in the district, Mr. Mohanty had said.

Additional bench demand

The lawyers of Sambalpur district are reportedly demanding establishment of an additional bench of the Orissa High Court somewhere in the western Odisha. Similarly, the lawyers of Ganjam district are also on strike since long demanding another bench of the High Court somewhere in the southern part of the State. Mr. Mohanty in his petition claimed that the requirement of approval under Article 10 of the Orissa High Court order in 1948 does not authorise the State government to take any decision on setting up additional benches of the High Court.

The petitioner also relied on a judgment delivered by the Orissa High Court in 1991 wherein it had said: “The State Legislature has no authority to enact law as regards the seat or seats of the High Court or to change the principal seat of the High Court from its present location.”

The petition had also said that any attempt by the State government to establish benches of the High Court elsewhere other than the principal seat would be viewed as a violation of the theory of separation of powers or infringement in the independence of the judiciary.

Ruling to facilitate hearings in district courts where advocates have been on strike since last year.