Himachal Pradesh High Court Cracks Down on Non-Compliance in Judicial Administration

Court Issues Warning of Contempt Proceedings Against State Officials Over Delayed Judicial Appointments and Arrears

In a significant judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has expressed stern disapproval over the State's non-compliance with directives concerning judicial appointments and the settlement of arrears for retired judges. The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, highlighted the necessity for strict adherence to rules regarding recruitment and administration of judicial staff, emphasizing that such sovereign functions should not be managed on ad hoc or contractual bases.

The case, titled "Court on its own motion v. State of H.P.," underscored issues such as the inappropriate recruitment modes for judicial staff and the introduction of a 'Job Trainee Policy' that fails to meet the required standards of judicial administration. The judgment also criticized the Finance Department for its sluggish response in approving the creation of additional judicial posts and enhancing remuneration for Law Clerks-cum-Research Assistants, labeling the delays as unwarranted.

The Court noted with concern the blatant defiance in settling outstanding arrears and expenses for retired judges, despite clear instructions from the Supreme Court. The judgment mentioned the potential for contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, if compliance is not ensured promptly. The Court's order emphasized that sovereign functions at both High Court and District Court levels require direct regulatory control and cannot be left to arbitrary administrative practices.

In response to the affidavit from the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), the Court found the explanations unsatisfactory, especially concerning the creation of necessary judicial posts and provision of vehicles for newly appointed judges. The affidavit revealed an ongoing impasse since 2021 regarding arrears for domestic help and telephone expenses for retired judges, which the Court labeled as a contemptuous disregard of judicial orders.

The judgment further highlighted the Finance Department's role as advisory, urging expedited decision-making in matters of judicial infrastructure and resource allocation. The Court directed the Registrar General to provide a counter affidavit detailing the status of pending proposals and approvals, setting the next hearing for January 6, 2026.

This judgment serves as a stark reminder of the judiciary's patience wearing thin with bureaucratic delays and non-compliance, signaling serious repercussions for continued defiance of court orders.

Bottom Line:

Recruitment and administration of judicial staff and facilities must adhere to proper regulatory control and not be managed on an ad hoc, daily wage, or contractual basis. Sovereign functions at High Court and District Court levels require strict adherence to rules and direct control. Non-compliance with judicial directions can attract contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Statutory provision(s): Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Court on its own motion v. State of H.P., (Himachal Pradesh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2823119