After the Maharashtra Government withdrew “unconditionally” its allegation of “serious bias” made against Justice Abhay Oka in the noise pollution matter, an unsatisfied Bombay High Court on Monday directed the State administration to file a formal affidavit showing “remorse” and tendering an apology to Chief Justice Manjula Chellur in this regard.
When the matter came for hearing before a re-constituted HC Bench headed by Justice Oka, Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakon clarified its earlier “serious bias” charge against Justice Oka, by saying, “Was not raised as an allegation against the judge personally, but was limited only to the subject matter involved”.
In a two-page submission made before the HC Bench, Advocate General Kumbhakon stated, “The contention (judge being biased) was not raised as an allegation against the Hon’ble Judge personally but was limited specifically to the subject matter involved in the group matters…The state only requested the Chief Justice (of the HC) to consolidate all noise pollution matters, and to place them before a bench of which Justice Oka is not a member”.
Taking serious exception to the manner in which the State Government had chosen to deal with matters relating its “serious bias” charge against a senior judge, a HC Bench of Justice Oka and Riyaz I Chagla — whose names were freshly listed on Monday morning as part of the Bench that would hear noise pollution-related cases — said that the mere submission could in no way be construed as an apology from the State and that the Government should tender an apology to the Chief Justice through an affidavit.
“A mere statement by the AG doesn’t translate into the state’s apology,” the HC Bench said, adding that the State Govt should have some remorse for filing such application seeking transfer of noise pollution-related cases to another Bench.
“It (the State) must submit an affidavit explaining its application before the Chief Justice. The State should show remorse. Also, such an affidavit must be signed by a senior state official, and it must identify the person who gave the AG’s office the direction to seek the transfer,” the Bench said.
“We are not touchy about the allegations against a particular judge. Our anxiety is about the consequences of the State’s frivolous action. The State’s action affects the dignity of the judiciary and of the 155-year old institution of this High Court,” the Bench noted.
In a strong rebuke to the State Government, the HC Bench went onto observe, “Your allegations mean that the Maharashtra Government doesn’t want the High Court to exist. It means that the state does not trust the high court and it says so in as many words”.