Pained To Observe Officers-In-Charge Are Not Providing Original Case File To Counsels: Rajasthan High Court Provides Measures For Improvement

The Court pointed out Rule 233 of the Rajasthan Law and Legal Affairs Department Manual, 1999, which outlines the duties of the Officers-In-Charge. “It appears that these officers are unaware of the duties assigned…and that is why they are handling Court cases, in a casual and negligent manner,” the Court remarked.

A Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand remarked, “All the efforts made to improve the current situation have been in vain inasmuch as the Court cases are treated with a lack of seriousness and urgency by the Officers and the OICs, for the reasons best known to them. Despite more than 20 years having passed, since the launch of the "LITES" portal, no significant measures have been taken to address the challenges faced by the Government Counsels in the Courts.”

Advocate Tanveer Ahamad appeared for the Petitioner, while GC Minakshi Jain represented the Respondents.

Court’s Observations

The Court noted, “This case is pending before this Court since 2016 i.e. for almost nine years. This Court feels pain to observe that in most of the cases, the Officers-In-Charge of the cases are not providing the original case file to their respective counsels and because of their such condemnable negligence and lethargic attitude, the cases are deferred from one day to another, which hampers the process of providing justice to the litigants.”

The Bench stated that the Justice Department, established in 2005, was tasked with monitoring litigation involving the State and assisting administrative departments in managing litigation effectively and economically. The department introduced the Litigation Information Tracking and Evaluation System (LITES) to track pending cases and improve disposal strategies.

The Bench also noted the "Rajasthan State Litigation Policy, 2008," formulated by the Department of Law and Legal Affairs, which included recommendations for posting Legal Service officers in departments with a high volume of court cases and establishing Legal Cells for better coordination.

The Court provided the following measures based on existing practices and potential areas for improvement:

• “Structured Performance Evaluation: Regular performance evaluations of officers handling cases should be implemented. These evaluations should focus on case resolution timelines, quality of legal representation, and responsiveness to court proceedings. A separate column should be included in the service records of the OICs for assessing their Annual Performance Reports (APRs) or Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), based on the number of cases successfully decided.
• Clear Accountability Mechanisms: It will make Officers accountable for the timely review of assigned cases, with penalties for unnecessary delays or negligence.
• Regular Inter-departmental Meetings: Regular meetings between various government departments and the department handling legal matters should be convened to ensure that progress of the cases is tracked and necessary resources are allocated.
• Cross-training of Officers: Officers from different departments should undergo legal training to better understand the requirements of cases for which they are responsible, so as to enhance their ability to assist counsels in case management.
• Continuing Legal Education (CLE): The Officers and department counsels be sent on periodic training for enabling them to understand new technologies and to develop case management strategies as it will increase their legal knowledge.
• Specialized Training Programs: Regular workshops be held for the Officers, in specialized areas of law (e.g., commercial law, environmental law, etc.) to improve their abilities to manage complexed cases efficiently.
• Case Management Software: Developing or enhancing the case management software will allow the Officers to track all the cases in real-time, receive automatic updates and get alerts about the deadlines. For instance, integrating the existing e-Courts system with departmental databases will facilitate the Officers to easily track the progress of cases and ensure timely action.
• AI-Powered Case Sorting: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) should be used to categorize the cases based on their urgency, type and complexity as AI can assist in recommending case priorities, ensuring that important cases are not delayed.
• Automated Documentation and Filing: Integrate automated systems may be evolved allowing for quick document filing, updating and sharing information across various departments and legal bodies which will reduce delays caused by manual paperwork.
• Engage Private Legal Experts: Governments may engage private law firms or expert counsels for specific type of cases, particularly for specialized legal matters. These experts can help in reducing the burden on the department Officers and provide timely legal expertise.
• Big Data and Analytics: Use of data analytics to identify patterns in case delays, analyze bottlenecks, and predict future workload trends. With insights from analytics, the Officers can allocate resources better and ensure no cases are delayed.
• Real-Time Monitoring: A Real-time monitoring dashboard should be established for the Officers to track the status of all the cases they are overseeing which will certainly ensure immediate and corrective action, if delays are identified.
• Reward Efficient Officers: Rewards, promotions or other forms of recognition be given to the Officers, who manage their caseload efficiently and ensure that cases are handled within the prescribed timelines. It will also encourage others to perform their duties diligently.
• To establish a Central Case Oversight Unit: A dedicated unit will oversee the performance of officers in charge of cases and ensure their accountability. Such unit will also provide assistance in clearing the backlogs and offer support in challenging cases.”

Accordingly, the High Court listed the matter on April 15, 2025 to check compliance.

Cause Title: Badri Narayan Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4213/2016)

Click here to read/download the Order