The Himachal Pradesh High Court has strongly criticized the state government for its continued failure to release essential funds required for the functioning of the judiciary. Expressing deep concern over the financial neglect, the Court directed the state’s Finance Secretary to appear personally before it with a bank draft of ₹10 crore in favour of the Registrar General of the High Court. The order stated that the official’s appearance would not be necessary if the amount was deposited before the specified date.
The proceedings stem from a suo motu public interest litigation initiated by the High Court in 2023 to address the shortage of financial resources affecting the judiciary’s functioning. The Registrar General informed the Court that more than ₹10 crore was pending from the state government, including approximately ₹6.88 crore meant for general administrative expenditure and ₹4.07 crore earmarked for the purchase of official vehicles for the courts. The Bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma observed that the prolonged non-release of funds had created serious administrative difficulties and could obstruct the smooth operation of the judicial system.
In its order, the Court stated that the continued failure of the executive to disburse the sanctioned amounts amounted to interference with the administration of justice. The judges noted that such financial starvation of the judiciary could be seen as an attempt to prejudice or interfere in judicial proceedings, falling within the scope of contempt as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Court underscored that ensuring financial autonomy is vital for preserving judicial independence and the rule of law.
The Bench further noted that the issue extended beyond routine expenses and included delays in implementing proposals for strengthening judicial infrastructure. A proposal submitted on July 12, 2023, for the establishment of additional courts—seven courts of Additional District Judges and thirty-nine of Civil Judges—had not yet been acted upon. Moreover, statutory responsibilities such as establishing a permanent Lok Adalat under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, and revising the stipends for law interns had also been neglected.
Taking a firm stance, the High Court emphasized that the judiciary cannot function effectively without adequate financial support. It warned that any further delay in the release of funds would invite contempt proceedings against responsible officials. The order reflects the Court’s determination to ensure that the judiciary receives timely and sufficient budgetary allocations from the executive branch, reaffirming that financial independence is a cornerstone of judicial integrity and effective justice delivery.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.