A bench led by Justice Amjad sayed asked the state to file a reply on this within a week.
The direction came while the court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and several intervention applications filed by lawyers in the high court seeking that they be allowed to travel to courts by suburban trains amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
On July 21 this year, the state government had filed an affidavit in the high court, informing that it could not permit lawyers to travel by local trains as it had restricted the number of trains and passengers as a safety measure due to the COVID-19 outbreak.
The state had said that restrictions on local trains had been imposed to "prevent overcrowding, and maintain social distancing" and lawyers could not claim any legal right to use them.
The petitioners also made a representation before the state government that was rejected on August 5.
The petitioners, however,challenged the state's decision and the court had asked the state to file a reply on the same on August 8.
On Thursday, however, the petitioners pointed out that the state was yet to file its reply.
They reiterated the need for permission to travel by the trains considering that the Bombay High Court had resumed physical hearings.
The petitioners' counsels Uday Warunjikar and Shyam Dewani told the court that now that the HC had resumed physical hearings, and several lower courts had already been permitting physical filings since the last few months, several lawyers were facing difficulties in reaching the courts.
The bench then asked the state if there was "any proposal currently under consideration to give permission" to lawyers for train travel. The state said it had not considered the same yet.
"Currently, there is no such proposal. But the Unlock process has already started in the state. Gradually, we will see. We will consider all these issues," Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni said.
The petitioners had earlier told the HC that several lawyers resided in the suburbs in Mumbai, and that they were undergoing tremendous inconvenience in traveling to courts and their offices due to restrictions on local train travel.
At the time, the state said that there were no restrictions on the use of personal vehicles, except for the number of passengers in one vehicle.
The lawyers, thus, were free to commute in private vehicles as long as they wore masks and took other COVID-19 related safety precautions, it had said.
The HC, which conducted hearings through video- conferencing during the lockdown, resumed physical hearings only for criminal appeals from August 31.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.