The Bombay high court has sought an explanation from the Maharashtra government about the shortage of court fee stamps, which are required by advocates and litigants.
A division bench of justices Abhay Oka and Girish Kulkarni has also asked the government to give details of the number of stamp vendors/windows selling court fee stamps in court premises and in which courts by October 14.
"What is the problem? Why are the court fee stamps not available? It's a basic requirement for litigation and other purposes as well," said justice Oka.
The HC was hearing a petition by an advocate, Mayuresh Modgi, highlighting the shortage in court fee stamps even in the court premises which have dedicated windows. His advocate Avinash Gokhale argued that there are just 16 vendors of court fee stamps in the entire city as against the 170 of earlier.
Gokhale argued that the government had informed him earlier that following the fake stamp paper scam, which was masterminded by Abdul Karim Telgi, several vendors had shut shops. "Government is using Telgi as a shield and refusing to address the issue," argued Gokhale.
The judges also raised a question as to why the vendor at Mazgaon sessions court wasn't shifted to Sewree court even though the Mazgaon court building was declared dilapidated and evacuated a year ago. The five-storey Mazgaon court building was vacated on July 218, 2013, after being declared dilapidated.
The petition states that the Constitution of India gives right to practise the profession of choice. Due to shortage in stamps, an advocate cannot practise as it is the basic requirement to affix a court fee stamp or file an affidavit on stamp paper.
It was pointed out to the court that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had issued a circular in April to the treasury department asking them to shut down vendors as necessary permission was not obtained from the RBI. "This was causing all the problem resulting in shortage of court fee stamps," said Gokhale.
Gokhale said that the high court had introduced a system of online payment of court fees. However, the glitch in this was that the advocate or the litigant should have an account with one of the five banks listed under the government receipt accounting system — Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, IDBI, Indian Overseas Bank and Union Bank of India.
This means that not all litigants would be able to make online payment of court fees. This is in addition to them not being able to buy stamps across the counter, argued Gokhale.
Government pleader requested that the matter be kept in November when the court reopens after Diwali vacation, which the judges refused.
){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}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}