Chandigarh, 22 Sept — The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association on Sunday rejected proposals to shift the high court to a new site, choosing instead to retain it within the existing complex. The decision, taken through a clear show of hands at a general body meeting, came despite repeated warnings from the bench that space shortages could make relocation inevitable.
The matter had been placed before the Bar after a bench headed by Chief Justice Ravi Shanker Jha directed Bar president Sartej Singh Narula to convey whether members were open to relocation. “The executive committee has passed a resolution that they are ready and willing to search for an alternative site for the high court. Let the resolution of the executive committee be placed before the general body, which if passed, would definitely be accepted by the court, not otherwise,” the bench had earlier observed.
Initially, formal voting was considered, but the general body chose to decide through a show of hands. The outcome effectively shuts the door on any immediate move to proposed sites at Sarangpur or IT Park.
The court had previously voiced concern over acute space constraints. “We are forced to think about an alternative site for the high court…. Such a good building you have. It’s a unique building. I have not seen such a building in the entire country. And yet you are compelling people to leave this building by your adamancy,” the bench remarked during a recent hearing.
Currently, the high court functions with 69 courtrooms against a sanctioned strength of 85 judges. The bench was informed that the number of functional courtrooms could rise to 89 if certain staff offices occupying courtroom space were relocated.
Two alternatives now remain before the court: converting adjoining forest land to allow expansion of the current premises, or constructing a new judicial complex opposite the Bar Room. The Chandigarh Administration has already cleared plans for 16 additional courtrooms across two floors, supported by two basement levels for parking, adding nearly two lakh square feet of space.
On the contentious issue of forest land, UT senior standing counsel Amit Jhanji has maintained that de-reservation is not possible, stressing that the proposed land forms part of an eco-fragile reserve forest in the Sukhna Lake catchment and falls within the eco-sensitive zone of the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary.
Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain, however, argued that the hurdle is not legal but political. “People who have to do it lack willpower,” he told the court, pointing to bureaucratic inertia as the real challenge in addressing the high court’s space crisis.
