GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
No.LAW 166 LAG 81 Karnataka Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 18th December 1981.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
No.LAW 166 LAG 81 Karnataka Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 18th December 1981.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
It has been observed that in good number of cases in which the State of Karnataka is a party, decisions of the Courts go aganist it. This has not only embarassed the State but has also contributed considerably to the delay in implementing the several welfare measures, besides forcing the state to incur avoidable huge expenditure, which the State can ill afford in the present critical financial position. An immediate necessity has therefore arisen to undertake a through study of the cases in which the decisions of the Courts have gone aganist the State with a view to finding out the exact causes as to why Courts had to give decisions adverse to the State.
2. Broadly speaking the reasons for the decisions adverse to the State could be attributed to one or more of the following reasons:-
(1) failure on the part of the departments concerned to place the full facts and the records relevant to the case before the Court;
(2) failure to present the State's case effectively i.e. failure to file suitable statement with all relevant facts and law and to point out the relevant ruling, if any, of the Courts in support of the State's case;
(3) the defective drafting of the law rules, orders etc; and
(4) not following of rules and procedure prescribed by law.
3. However, in order to pin point where excatly the defect lay in each case and to take remedial steps in order to see that such a defect does not reoccur it has been decided that a review of the records relating to the cases in which decisions have been given by the courts aganist the state should be undertaken in a meeting of the following officers:-
1. Additional Chief Secretary;
2. Advocate-General or his representative;
3. Secretary to Government of the concerned department; and
4. Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs.
4. To begin with, it has been decided that such a review should be confined to the orders made aganist the State by the High Court in Writ Petitions or Writ Appeals. The process of such a review could be extended to the decisions of the other Courts also in furture.
5. After the close of a month and in the first week of the succeeding month the Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs would collect copies of the orders of the Courts in which decisions are given aganist the State during the previous month and convene a meeting in the chambers of the Additional Chief Secretary on a date and time in the second week of the succeeding month to be notified. The meeting will be attended to by the Advocate-General or his representative, the Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs and the Secretary to Government of the department concerned for the purpose of the review.
6. The first meeting to review the orders of the High Court received in the month of December 1981 would accordingly be held in the month of January 1982.
7. In complicated and important cases as and when arguments are scheduled to be heard by the High Court it is desirable to have meetings of the Advocate in charge of the case, the Secretary of the department concerned and the Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs a day or two earlier to the date fixed for arguments and again once or twice as may be necessary if the arguments last for more than one or two days to study the progress of the case and the points raised in the Court so that a combined effort may be made to effectively meet the points raised by the other side. Secretary, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs who will be in touch with the concerned Advocates will kindly arrange for such meetings.
8. All the Secretaries to Government are requested to extend their full co-operation in this exercise.
2. Broadly speaking the reasons for the decisions adverse to the State could be attributed to one or more of the following reasons:-
(1) failure on the part of the departments concerned to place the full facts and the records relevant to the case before the Court;
(2) failure to present the State's case effectively i.e. failure to file suitable statement with all relevant facts and law and to point out the relevant ruling, if any, of the Courts in support of the State's case;
(3) the defective drafting of the law rules, orders etc; and
(4) not following of rules and procedure prescribed by law.
3. However, in order to pin point where excatly the defect lay in each case and to take remedial steps in order to see that such a defect does not reoccur it has been decided that a review of the records relating to the cases in which decisions have been given by the courts aganist the state should be undertaken in a meeting of the following officers:-
1. Additional Chief Secretary;
2. Advocate-General or his representative;
3. Secretary to Government of the concerned department; and
4. Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs.
4. To begin with, it has been decided that such a review should be confined to the orders made aganist the State by the High Court in Writ Petitions or Writ Appeals. The process of such a review could be extended to the decisions of the other Courts also in furture.
5. After the close of a month and in the first week of the succeeding month the Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs would collect copies of the orders of the Courts in which decisions are given aganist the State during the previous month and convene a meeting in the chambers of the Additional Chief Secretary on a date and time in the second week of the succeeding month to be notified. The meeting will be attended to by the Advocate-General or his representative, the Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs and the Secretary to Government of the department concerned for the purpose of the review.
6. The first meeting to review the orders of the High Court received in the month of December 1981 would accordingly be held in the month of January 1982.
7. In complicated and important cases as and when arguments are scheduled to be heard by the High Court it is desirable to have meetings of the Advocate in charge of the case, the Secretary of the department concerned and the Secretary to Government, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs a day or two earlier to the date fixed for arguments and again once or twice as may be necessary if the arguments last for more than one or two days to study the progress of the case and the points raised in the Court so that a combined effort may be made to effectively meet the points raised by the other side. Secretary, Department of Law and Parliamentary Affairs who will be in touch with the concerned Advocates will kindly arrange for such meetings.
8. All the Secretaries to Government are requested to extend their full co-operation in this exercise.
sd/-
R.A.Naik,
Additional Chief Secretary to Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment