Kerala High Court Denies Relief To Petitioner Suppressing Facts, Orders Enquiry Into Allotment Of Govt Scheme Houses On Puramboke Land Candidate Missing Physical Test For Minor Illness Has No Enforceable Right To Rescheduling: Supreme Court Prolonged Incarceration And Parity Constitute Valid Grounds For Regular Bail: Supreme Court Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Cannot File Evidence-In-Chief By Affidavit Under Section 145 NI Act: Orissa High Court Borrowers Have No Right To Personal Hearing Before Fraud Classification, But Full Forensic Audit Report Must Be Supplied: Supreme Court Pendency Of Matrimonial Dispute With General Allegations Not A Valid Ground To Deny Public Employment: Allahabad High Court Minimum Five Persons Mandatory To Prove 'Preparation For Dacoity' Under Section 399 IPC: Gujarat High Court Suit For Specific Performance Not Maintainable Without Prayer To Set Aside Termination Of Agreement: Madras High Court Trial Court Must Indicate Material Forming Basis Of Charge, Mechanical Framing Of Charges Impermissible: Madhya Pradesh High Court Voluntary Retirement Deemed Accepted If Positive Order Of Refusal Is Not Communicated Within Notice Period: Supreme Court Court Cannot Convict One Accused And Acquit Another On Same Evidence: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Due To Unreliable Last-Seen Evidence And Principle Of Parity 138 NI Act | Accused Cannot Rebut Presumption Of Legally Enforceable Debt At Pre-Trial Stage In Cheque Bounce Cases: Supreme Court More Meritorious PWD Candidates From Reserved Categories Can Claim Unreserved PWD Posts In Open Competition: Supreme Court Meritorious Reserved Candidates Can Claim Unreserved Horizontal Vacancies Based On Merit: Supreme Court Employee Not Entitled To Gratuity Until Conclusion Of Both Departmental And Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Stamp Duty Recovery Against Legal Heirs Is Strictly Limited To The Extent Of Inherited Estate: Allahabad High Court Single Lathi Blow On Head During Sudden Altercation Amounts To Culpable Homicide Under Section 304 Part II IPC, Not Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Habeas Corpus Maintainable For Child Custody Against Father; Cannot Be Dismissed Merely Due To Alternate Remedy: Allahabad High Court "Plea Of Ignorance In Digital Era Inexcusable": Punjab & Haryana HC Imposes Rs 10K Cost On Accused For Hiding Prior Bail Dismissal Discrepancies In Name And Age On Monthly Pass Fail To Establish 'Bona Fide Passenger' Status In Railway Accident Claim: Delhi High Court "Last Seen" Theory A Weak Link If Time Gap Is Wide: Bombay High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life For Murder Failure To Conduct Pre-Anaesthetic Check-Up Prima Facie Amounts To Gross Medical Negligence Under Section 304A IPC: Kerala High Court

P&H High Court’s Infrastructure Push: One-Week Fire-Safety Deadline, 60-Day Parking Upgrade, and a Constitutional Reminder to the Executive

23 August 2025 11:49 AM

By: Deepak Kumar


“Judiciary is the third pillar of democracy… the edifice of democracy will crumble if any of the three pillars is weakened…Issue the fire safety certificate within one week—or we will implead MC Chandigarh.” - Punjab & Haryana High Court passed a time-bound interim order tightening the screws on administrative inaction over judicial infrastructure. The Bench directed that the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, must issue a fire-safety certificate for the newly allotted Sector-17 premises within a week, warned of impleadment upon default, mandated “green pavers” in the kutcha parking within 60 days, and pressed the U.T. Administration to adopt a “facilitative stance” toward urgent space augmentation for the High Court. The ruling underscores that judicial functionality is a democratic imperative, not a discretionary convenience.

Proceeding in a continuing PIL on a “holistic plan” for court infrastructure, the Bench recorded that, pursuant to earlier orders, Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain chaired a joint meeting on 07.08.2025 with the Bar and the U.T. Administration, and a follow-up was scheduled for 20.08.2025. The Court directed that the minutes of both meetings be brought on record on the next date.

At the forefront was safety compliance for the Sector-17 building, already handed over for administrative branches of the High Court. The Court noted with concern that the Municipal Corporation had not issued the requisite fire-safety certificate, “which disables the High Court from taking advantage of the possession handed over of the said four floors including basement,” and therefore ordered issuance “within next one week,” warning that otherwise it would implead the Corporation and “take action in accordance with law.”

Parallelly, easing day-to-day functioning through immediate parking relief was treated as non-negotiable. After the Bar confirmed concurrence with the Building Committee minutes, the Court directed completion of “laying green pavers in kutcha parking within sixty days from today.”

For medium-term accommodation, the Bench took judicial notice that the U.T. Secretariat had shifted to a new complex, leaving parts of the erstwhile building vacant. It directed the Administration to “explore the possibility of allotting two (2) floors for housing the Branches of the High Court which are facing acute shortage of space in Sector-1,” filing an affidavit and, crucially, adopting “a facilitative stance… rather than adversarial.”

The Court anchored these directions in constitutional comity, reminding the Executive that “the requirement/need/constraints of the High Court are the requirement/need/constraints of the Chandigarh Administration,” and cautioning: “It goes without saying that judiciary is the third pillar of democracy… The edifice of democracy will crumble if any of the three pillars is weakened.”

Finally, diagnosing the structural capacity deficit, the Bench recorded that “as against sanctioned strength of 85, the High Court has only 69 operational court-rooms. This dissuades the High Court from working full strength,” beseeching a “pragmatic view” and approval of the Holistic Plan, “be it restrictively.”

The core directions were unambiguous and time-bound. On fire safety: “U.T. Administration is directed to ensure issuance of fire safety certificate by the Municipal Corporation within next one week, failing which this Court will be compelled to implead Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh as party and take action in accordance with law.” On parking: “The U.T. Administration… is directed to complete the work of laying green pavers in kutcha parking within sixty days from today.” On interim accommodation: “This Court thus directs the U.T. Chandigarh Administration to explore the possibility of allotting two (2) floors… by filing affidavit in this regard,” while “adopt[ing] a facilitative stance… rather than adversarial.”

On the longer-term new-building site, the Court consciously held its hand until the 20.08.2025 stakeholder meeting concluded: “this Court refrains from making any comments or directions in this regard.” Listing was fixed thereafter, with pending directions from the 01.08.2025 order to be taken up on the next date.

By welding immediate compliance (fire safety within a week; parking upgrade within 60 days) to an insistence on cooperative federalism in action (“facilitative” not “adversarial”), the Bench situates infrastructure not as a managerial afterthought but as the lifeblood of constitutional adjudication. The message is plain: executive inertia that stymies court functioning imperils democratic equilibrium—and the Court will not permit that equilibrium to slip.

Date of Decision: 13.08.2025

Latest Legal News