In his plea that has been accepted for hearing by the apex court, Dhonchak has raised several technical and practical difficulties in the hearing of the matter before the HC at Chandigarh. He has mainly pleaded for shifting of the CWP No. 24795/2022 from the high court at Chandigarh to Delhi HC.
The order restraining Dhonchak from passing any adverse order was passed by a division comprising Justice M S Ramachandra Rao and Justice H S Madan on October 27 after hearing a plea filed by DRT Bar association against the functioning of Dhonchak. The DRT bar has also been boycotting Dhonchak’s court.
Dhonchak, who is a retired judicial officer of the Haryana Superior Judicial Services, has already approached the SC challenging the order passed by Justice M S Ramachandra Rao headed bench. In his special leave petition (SLP) before the SC Dhonchak has contended that the HC order amounts to usurpation of the powers of the Central Government as well as Chief Justice of India by the Punjab and Haryana high court.
“The suspension of work/strike/boycott of the courts by the advocates has no legal sanctity, whatsoever. The impugned order passed by the High Court has virtually legalised the illegal and contemptuous boycott of the Tribunal by the Advocates and the same is likely to have a devastating effect not only upon the independent functioning of the Tribunals but also the whole district Judiciary of the country,” Dhonchak has submitted in his previous SLP.
Dhonchak has also contended that the imposition of costs is necessary to lubricate the wheels of justice as has been observed by the SC. The Tribunal cannot be left at the mercy of advocates/parties for compliance of its orders to facilitate the ripening of the cases for final decision and a case is not expected to be adjourned time and again. Imposition of costs is no misbehaviour by a Presiding Officer.
A former Haryana Superior Judicial Services officer, Dhonchak had retired as district and sessions judge Gurgaon in March 2021. Known for his integrity and as an upright Judge, he has been proactive for liberty of an individual.