‘No right to move plea’: Bombay High Court rejects PIL seeking to use old HC complex in Goa as mediation centre

The Goa government has assured the preservation of Lyceum buildings as they require the premises to house some of its offices. The petitioners, however, argued before the Bombay HC that if it was allowed, history may be wiped out.

The high court orally remarked that the PIL was filed more in the personal interest of the petitioners than in public interest.The high court orally remarked that the PIL was filed more in the personal interest of the petitioners than in public interest (Representative image).

The Bombay High Court on Monday rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to use Lyceum, the old high court complex at Altinho in Goa’s Panaji, as an arbitration and mediation centre. The Goa government has, meanwhile, assured to preserve the architectural design of the Lyceum buildings as the complex was required to house the offices of some of its departments.

A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad, sitting at the principal seat in Mumbai, noted the Goa government’s statement that it shall provide all necessary facilities and finances for the establishment of a mediation centre.

The high court, however, observed that the petitioners failed to disclose any statutory right or legal basis that entitled them to seek make their plea. “There is no right, much less a statutory right to the petitioners to seek designation of the Lyceum complex as the centre for arbitration and mediation. While access to justice remains a constitutional goal, such an objective cannot be achieved merely by directing the state to designate a particular complex…,” the high court order stated.

The new high court complex at Porvorim was inaugurated in March 2021 and, subsequently, the Bombay High Court bench in Goa, functioning from Lyceum complex, was shifted to the new complex. Three months ago, the high court had pulled up the Goa government for sealing and locking Lyceum buildings in the old high court complex.

‘Majestic and iconic buildings’

Advocate Joao Abreu Lobo, appearing for the petitioners Vishwesh A Kamat and another person, argued that access to justice would be impeded if the Lyceum Complex premises were to be used for administrative work instead of judicial work. The petitioners further argued that the Lyceum complex has five buildings with meticulously furnished courtrooms and they should be used for judicial work and other purposes pertaining to adjudication.

Highlighting the historical significance of Lyceum buildings, the petitioners argued that if the said court buildings are utilised by the Goa government for its offices, the entire piece of history may be wiped out, and there was a need to preserve the “majestic and iconic buildings” for future generations.

While the petitioners’ lawyer said they belonged to the North Goa Bar Association, the lawyer for the South Goa High Court Bar Association supported the petitioners’ concerns.

Story continues below this ad

On the other hand, Goa Advocate General Devidas Pangam opposed the PIL and stated that the architectural design of the Lyceum complex shall be preserved, and it will not be used for any commercial purposes.

Pangam had earlier told the high court that nearly 20 government offices were situated at the Junta house in Altinho, which were in a dilapidated condition and required to be vacated urgently. On Monday, he said that 11 government departments were being shifted and it was proposed to shift other offices as well.

He had said that the state government was ready to provide assistance for the creation of a mediation centre in Goa and a separate suitable piece of land shall be identified for the same, for which the government will bear the necessary expenses.

‘PIL more in petitioners’ personal interest’

The high court orally remarked that the PIL was filed more in the personal interest of the petitioners than in public interest. The bench, after perusing photographs of the Lyceum complex spread over nearly 6,500 sq m, said it was a “huge” establishment and the same cannot be kept only for the purpose of mediation and arbitration.

Story continues below this ad

“Handing over of these building is a matter pending on the administrative side. It is indicated in an earlier order that large number of courts in the state are lacking the basic infrastructure and basic facilities are not available for judges, court staff, litigants and Bar members,” it stated.

The high court is alive to the situation and, through the legal services authorities, has been progressing mediation through Lok Adalats. There are four mediation centres across Maharashtra which are catering to the needs of the litigants.

“However, when we say that needs of litigants are being taken care of, we in no manner suggest that HC is not inclined to directions for expansion of facilities in future. More than four times of space of old complex has been provided to the new HC building,” the bench said, while dismissing the plea.

Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions. Expertise & Authority Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage. Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in: Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include: Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes). Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty). Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict. Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability. Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges. Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More

 

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement