I am amused reading comments about `maintainablily' voiced by some of most learned pensioners. Objections citing maitainabilty is the initial weapon any experienced lawyer would use to weed out attempts to drag the cases by the opposing party and Mr. Asthana's lawyer (not Mr. Asthana himself) has done the right thing to bring the issue under litigation (appeal by L.I.C.) against the Jaipur H.C. judgement (and also other H.C. judgements, which have specifically quoted and agreed with the decision of Justice Bhandari) to the right course. If the Spl leave petitions are dismissed then the court can concentrate on the points raised by L.I.C. in its Civil appeal and by the GOI through its affidavit.
Courts (except in some spl. cases) generally follow traditions and Advocates cannot break these traditions though on several occasions they attempt to do that. True that L.I.C. Pensioners are getting older and older and as time pass by some of them leave for heavenly abode; but simultaneously the cases already piled up in the courts also get loaded with years as time pass by. It should be the constant endeavour of Advocates to attract attention and sympathy from the hearing judges so that his clients' case is heard of speedily. But we should also remember that Advocates of every other case would also try the same trick and in the process clients of those who fail to convince the Court for speedy disposal naturally get frustrated.
I am 75 and like all other pensioners I am also anxious for a favourable judgement from the Apex Court. Meanwhile let us not waste our energy huffing and puffing and instead try to find the most effective armoury to counter the tricky points raised by Advocates of L.I.C. and GOI. As I can see from the correspondences published in PC that we have right weapon, which our Advocates in S.C. should use effectively. Let us pray that they would do that.
B. S. Hegde
UDUPI
