Rajasthan High Court: While taking suo motu cognizance based on a news report published in the Hindi daily newspaper Dainik Bhaskar dated 13-05-2025, regarding a grave issue related to “Access to Justice,” i.e., State Government, vide an order dated 09-04-2025, rendered 16 permanent Lok Adalats non-functional, a Division Bench of Shree Chandrashekhar and Sandeep Shah, JJ., impleaded the respondents and directed them to file their replies.
The report pointed out that the impact of the shutdown was visibly severe in Jodhpur, where approximately 972 cases remained pending. It was further stated that around 10,000 cases across Rajasthan are likely affected due to the cessation of functioning of these Lok Adalats.
The Court noted the serious ramifications of shutting down the functioning of Lok Adalats, which are an essential part of the legal services delivery mechanism aimed at ensuring “access to justice”. The Court reiterated the importance of ensuring that “the public at large has the right to demand speedy justice” and the same cannot be denied “solely on the ground that it was a policy decision.”
The Court emphasised on the principle laid down in Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India, (2012) 6 SCC 502, where it was held that “matters relating to framing and implementation of policy primarily fall in the domain of the Government… But this general rule is not free from exceptions. The courts have repeatedly taken the view that they would not refuse to adjudicate upon policy matters if the policy decisions are arbitrary, capricious or mala fide.” The Court stressed that the jurisdiction of Constitutional Courts extends to scrutinizing policy decisions that infringe upon fundamental rights, especially those affecting access to justice.
The Court formally impleaded Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan; Additional Chief Secretary-cum-Finance Secretary; Secretary, Department of Personnel; Principal Secretary, Law & Legal Affairs Department and Member Secretary, Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, as respondents and directed them to file their response.
[Suo Moto v. State of Rajasthan, Decided on 13-05-2025]
