Who Decides Where a High Court Sits — Government or Judiciary?

Amid sustained protests and a prolonged debate over the proposed relocation of the Gauhati High Court to Rangmahal in North Guwahati, Assam Advocate General Devajit Saikia on Saturday addressed a press conference to clarify what he described as “persistent misinformation” surrounding the issue.

The press meet was held in connection with the foundation stone-laying ceremony of the new High Court complex scheduled to take place at Rangmahal on January 11.

Saikia said the controversy over the relocation process has been ongoing for the past three to four years, with sections of the legal fraternity supporting the move while others have opposed it. He stressed that the decision regarding the shifting of the High Court was taken during the tenure of then Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and was not a unilateral decision of the Assam government, contrary to claims made by protesters.

Referring to developments in 2022, the Advocate General explained that in October and November of that year, there had been an attempt to shift the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) court to Boragaon. On November 25, 2022, a decision was taken in this regard, but at that time, there was no proposal to relocate the Gauhati High Court itself. He said the Bar Council had then expressed concern about moving only one court, but had clearly stated that it would have no objection if all courts were shifted to a single location.

Highlighting infrastructural constraints at the existing High Court premises, Saikia pointed out that the number of judges has increased significantly—from 19 earlier to 30 at present—without a corresponding expansion of facilities. Serious concerns have been raised regarding judges’ security and accommodation, as most judges currently reside in flats and only seven official quarters are available. There is also no adequate arrangement for women lawyers to sit or dine, no proper parking facilities, and no auditorium or functional canteen.

Saikia noted that nearly 1,000 practising advocates attend the court daily, most of whom arrive in personal vehicles. Due to the lack of space, many lawyers are forced to open chambers inside their cars. He recalled that even Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, who practised law until 2001, has publicly acknowledged facing similar difficulties during his time at the Gauhati High Court.

The Advocate General further stated that opposition to the relocation has remained unchanged among certain groups despite repeated consultations. He mentioned that the Chief Justice’s official residence has already been declared a heritage building by the Assam government and will be preserved accordingly.

Clarifying the legal authority behind the move, Saikia said the power to decide where the High Court sits and how it functions lies solely with the Chief Justice, not the state government.

“The High Court does not function as per the wishes of the Assam government. In fact, the High Court often points out the government’s mistakes,” he said, rejecting allegations of political interference.

He also addressed claims of legal violations, stating that protesters have misinterpreted provisions of the 1971 Gauhati High Court rules. He explained that if the High Court were to establish an outlying bench, for instance in Dibrugarh or Silchar, presidential assent would be required, but the present case does not fall under that category. He added that relocation of High Courts is not unique to Assam and has taken place in several other states.

“A principal bench can be shifted anywhere within Guwahati or to any other district in the state. For example, relocating the principal bench to Dibrugarh would not require presidential assent. However, if the court decides to establish an outlying bench in a place like Barpeta, presidential approval would be necessary. Similarly, if a new state is formed in the Northeast and there is a demand for a High Court bench there, presidential assent would also be required. The legal position is that simple and clear,” Saikia said.

On allegations related to land acquisition, Saikia said many of those claiming to have lost land have already accepted compensation. He asserted that the relocation to Rangmahal would not yield any political benefit to anyone.

“I was born in Uzan Bazar. If there was a reason to protest emotionally, I should have done so first,” he remarked.

He also criticised the Bar Association’s conduct, stating that despite having around 5,000+ registered members, only 1,398 participated in a recent vote opposing the relocation.

“For the relocation of a High Court, the consent of the Bar Association is not mandatory. What is required is the approval of the Governor,” he clarified.

Issuing a direct challenge to critics, the Advocate General said,

“If the protesters wish to approach the court, they are free to do so. I openly invite them.” He concluded by saying that misleading people cannot sustain a movement for long.

Meanwhile, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma also addressed the media and echoed similar sentiments, asserting that the ongoing sit-in protest by the Gauhati High Court Bar Association lacks logical grounds and is driven by unfounded apprehensions. He dismissed claims that commuting to North Guwahati would be costly, stating that there is no need for anyone to spend Rs 400–500 daily to reach the new court complex.

“The moment the Guwahati–North Guwahati bridge is inaugurated in February, reaching the High Court will take only a few minutes,” Sarma said, adding that connectivity concerns will soon become irrelevant. He emphasised that North Guwahati is being developed as a future-ready city and forms a key part of the state’s long-term urban planning.

“If I continue as Chief Minister for the next 10 years, I will ensure that a metro rail system runs along the ring road,” Sarma said, underlining the government’s commitment to improving transport infrastructure. He described opposition to the relocation as pessimistic, remarking, “Those opposing the move are looking at it through the lens of despair. I see it with hope.”

The Chief Minister made it clear that the decision to relocate the High Court was not taken by the state government alone.

“This is not my decision. The judges themselves have taken this call,” he said, dismissing allegations of political motivation.

Sarma also revealed that a full-fledged “Judicial City” will be developed at Rangmahal, beginning with an initial investment of Rs 500 crore, followed by an additional Rs 1,200 crore in later phases. The project will include modern court infrastructure and all facilities required for the smooth functioning of the judicial system.

Reiterating his vision, the Chief Minister said that if he remains in office, a metro rail network along the ring road would be introduced within the next decade, further strengthening connectivity to the proposed High Court complex.

Also Read: Assam: Gauhati High Court Bar Association Boycotts Foundation Stone Ceremony, Announces Hunger Strike Over Proposed Relocation