Govt officials should be called to courts only in exceptional cases: Centre to SC

The SOP placed reliance upon the earlier judgments of the Supreme Court providing that courts should practice necessary restrain while summoning government officials during hearing of cases

New Delhi: In a draft SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) submitted for consideration of the Supreme Court, the Union government has said that personal presence of government officials in courts should be sought only in exceptional cases, and not as a matter of routine.

“Howsoever, in exceptional cases too wherein in-person appearance of government official is still called for by the court, the court should allow as a first option, to appear before it through VC (video conference),” the SOP said.

---

The SOP placed reliance upon the earlier judgments of the Supreme Court providing that courts should practice necessary restrain while summoning government officials during hearing of cases like writs, PILs and contempt cases. Referring to an instance wherein the Patna High Court reprimanded the Principal Secretary for Housing and Urban Development of the Bihar government for “inappropriate attire” though he was dressed in a formal white shirt and trousers, the Centre said that courts should refrain commenting on dress or physical appearance of government officials.

Further, the judge of the Patna HC had asked if the officer had attended the civil service training institute in Mussoorie and if they had not told him how to appear in court. “Government officials are not officers of the court and there should be no objection to their appearing in a decent work dress unless such appearance is unprofessional or unbecoming of her/his position,” the SOP said.

It said that no contempt should be initiated based on statements made by government counsels that is contrary to the stand of the government affirmed through affidavit or written statement or reply submitted before the court. “Compliance should not be insisted upon by court directing a particular outcome, especially on matters in the executive domain,” read the SOP.

In case, time-frame stated in the judicial order is requested to be revised on behalf of the government, the court may allow for a revised reasonable time-frame for compliance, it added. Recently, the Calcutta High Court had suspended the Chief Secretary of Andaman and Nicobar administration while ordering the Lieutenant Governor to deposit a sum of Rs 5 lakh from his own funds in a contempt proceedings. Later, the direction was stayed by an SC bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud.