Faceless Appeal Scheme: Why should we interfere if assesses are happy, asks Bombay HC

Loading

Faceless Appeal Scheme:

Why should we interfere if assesses are happy, asks Bombay HC

A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik on Friday heard the plea challenging the Faceless Appeal Scheme.
The Bombay High Court on Friday heard the plea challenging the Faceless
Appeal Scheme. The Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik asked the petitioner to respond as to why should the court use their judicial interference for those who are not aggrieved by this scheme.
Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh apprised the court of the number of appeals which had been disposed off under the faceless scheme and the number of appellants who requested for a personal hearing. Anil Singh said that so far the appeal units had received only 580 applications for personal hearing.
On Monday, the ASG had submitted that over 56,100 matters had been disposed of and only one among them had sought for personal hearing. Since the number seemed to be small in comparison to the majority who were not objecting to proceeding under the scheme, ASG Anil Singh requested the High Court to pass an order that those 580 applications ought not be heard till Parliament takes a decision.
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar objected to the figures submitted by the ASG. He stated that as per the statement before the Supreme Court, no appeals were being heard at all and not even notices for hearings were being issued. The statement which the ASG submitted on the number of appeals which have been disposed of seemed contrary to that submission, Arvind Datar said. Additionally, he argued that Winter Session of Parliament was soon getting over, but there did not seem to be any bill pertaining to the faceless appeal scheme.To this, ASG Anil Singh replied that tabled or not, the Centre was going to have to answer to the Supreme Court as well. In the meantime, an order could be passed protecting those who do not want to be included in the scheme and the other majority who seemed happy with the scheme, could continue with the scheme, Anil Singh added.
The High Court, however, questioned Arvind Datar as to why should the court use their judicial interference for those who are not unhappy with the scheme. “Your private matter was converted into a PIL based on the nature of reliefs sought. But we do not see any assesses coming before us with grievance.
Why should we interfere if the assesses are happy with the scheme? If anyone has any grievance they can approach us with their grievance.” the Bench said.
Arvind Datar emphasized that the present PIL raised a question of rule of law.
The petitioner had over 3000 members and instead of having multiple
Menu