"These are elementary things which need to be done," the Bombay High Court remarked on Friday, while expressing displeasure over the state government's negligent attitude in providing basic facilities like toilets and water coolers in courts across the state for litigants.
"These are elementary things which need to be done," the Bombay High Court remarked on Friday, while expressing displeasure over the state government's negligent attitude in providing basic facilities like toilets and water coolers in courts across the state for litigants.
A division bench of justices Abhay Oka and A K Menon said, "Unless we issue directions nothing will happen. A time-bound programme has to be laid down."
The court was aghast at the fact that government had provided water coolers but no funds were allotted for installing them.
Government pleader, Abhinandan Vangyani, though defended the government by saying, "I would sit with the high court registry and come out with a time-bound plan for providing the facilities." The court, though, was not satisfied with the reply and said, "A time-bound programme will have to be given."
The bench directed the registry to give a note on the courts in which water coolers or toilets are not installed. The court also asked the registry to verify the bare acts uploaded on the state government websites and whether they were updated, a list of these things have to be given to the court by February 2.
The directions were given during the hearing of a public interest litigation filed by Litigants Association of Maharashtra, alleging that in several courts the toilets are not cleaned for days and there is no potable water.
The court on the last occasion had said that barring a few courts in the state most have a large footfall and litigants and witnesses have to wait for a long time. There are space constraints in some courts but some systems need to be worked out for having a cleaner environment.
Recently, the government sanctioned 179 posts for new judges in the lower courts. However, advocates have raised concerns on provision of basic facilities and accommodation for them. The PIL states that lower courts don't have basic facilities, because of which litigants have to go out of court premises. The court will hear the matter on February 4.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}