ORDER : SONIA GOKANI, J. 1. The present petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner in the public interest seeking directions against the respondents for streamlining the process of virtual hearing and restraining personal/physical hearing before the respondents considering the recent pandemic of COVID-19. The petitioner is an advocate enrolled on the roll of the Bar Council of Gujarat and practicing in various Courts. He has been member of various committees of the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India (ICAI) and is also an RTI activist and has given the details of various PILs, he has preferred before this Court. 2. According to the petitioner, due to severe outbreak of COVID 19 virus, which led to pandemic, the High Court had issued circular on 22.03.2021 issuing guidelines for virtual functioning of the Courts. According to him, latest records of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation dated 29.03.2021 are indicating possibility of spread of infection of COVID-19 to its maximum level and there is a continuous rise in the number of patients. It has also led the State Government imposing the night curfew in the metropolitan towns. The grievance on the part of the petitioner is that the respondent No.1 issued a notification dated 19.03.2021 along the line of circular issued by this Court on 05.02.2021 of opening of physical hearing of the District Courts. It would be appropriate to reproduced the circular dated 19.03.2021 of the Respondents: Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority 4th Floor, Sahyog Sankul, Sector-11, Gandhinagar-382010. Telephone No.:(079)-232-58659 Website: https://gujrera.gujarat.gov.in No:GujRera/VHT/2073/2021 19/03/2021 Circular: Subject: Direction regarding quasilegal procedures to be carried out at authority level. Hearing of Suo Motu, NCQR, NCAR and complaints cases is conducted online at the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gandhinagar due to COVID-19 pandemic. But, SOP has been issued by the circular dated 05/02/2021 of the Gujarat High Court to start physical hearing in the High Court and Subordinate Courts from 01/03/2021. Therefore, hearing of Suo Motu, NCQR, NCAR cases will be conducted online at the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gandhinagar as a part of saving time and energy at the authority level. It has been decided at authority level that offline hearing will be conducted in consumer redressal cases at authority and adjudicating level. Therefore, hearing of Suo Motu, NCQR, NCAR cases will be conducted online at the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gandhinagar as a part of saving time and energy at the authority level. It has been decided at authority level that offline hearing will be conducted in consumer redressal cases at authority and adjudicating level. Thus, all the applicants and concerned parties are hereby informed to remain present during online as well as offline hearing of cases. Sd./- Secretary, The Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gandhinagar. 3. The grievance on the part of the petitioner is that the respondent no.1 stopped the virtual hearing and insisted on the physical hearing in view of the said circular dated 19.03.2021, interpreting the High Court circular dated 05.02.2021. The proceedings before the respondents is of summary nature and do not require the presence of witnesses or leading of oral evidence and therefore, the requirement of physical hearing as contemplated for the District Courts can not be equated with the proceedings before the respondents. 3.1 According to the petitioner, the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad and the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad etc. have also chosen to stop hearing through physical mode and are adopting the virtual hearings therefore, various communications have been made by the petitioner for seeking the informations regarding the physical hearing conducted by the respondents authority and on some of the occasions, the requests for starting of virtual hearing also were made, the details of which also is provided in the petition, but in vain. According to the petitioner, this continuation of the physical hearing would be life threatening for the lawyers and the litigants. It is urged that like the tribunals such as NCLT working on hybrid mode, there has to be some balance to be maintained. According to the petitioner, this continuation of the physical hearing would be life threatening for the lawyers and the litigants. It is urged that like the tribunals such as NCLT working on hybrid mode, there has to be some balance to be maintained. It has therefore, prayed as follows: “(a) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/order/direction to the Respondents to conduct all the judicial proceedings through video conferencing in view of the circulars and the Gujarat High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts(High Court and Subordinate Courts), 2021 issued by this Hon’ble Court in light of COVID-19 pandemic and further be pleased to quash and set aside the circular dated 19.03.21 (AnnexureK) issued by the Respondent No.1; (b) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/order/direction to the Respondents to streamline the virtual hearing in light of the circulars and the Gujarat High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts (High Court and Subordinate Courts), 2021 issued by this Hon’ble Court and further be pleased to issue appropriate direction to the Respondents to frame guidelines/standard operating measures for virtual hearing to conduct judicial proceedings before the Respondent authorities in light of COVID-19 pandemic; (c) Your Lordships may be pleased to pass a Writ of in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/order/direction to the Respondents, till the virtual hearing is not streamline/conducted, the Respondents may not pass any coercive orders in any matter in light the above facts and circumstances of the case; (d) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the Respondents from conducting any judicial proceedings/hearing through physical hearing and further be pleased to direct the Respondents not to call/compel any lawyers/practitioners/litigants for physical hearing of any judicial proceedings/hearing/matter; (e) Ad interim relief in terms of paragraph (d) (f) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant any other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem just, fit and expedient be granted in favour of the Petitioners.” 3.2 This Court issued the Notice on 20.04.2021. Today, learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Luvkumar appeared with learned Assistant Government Pleader, Mr. Dharmesh Devnani for the respondents. Today, learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Luvkumar appeared with learned Assistant Government Pleader, Mr. Dharmesh Devnani for the respondents. The Note has been submitted due to paucity of time wherein it is clearly indicated that due to prevailing COVID-19 pandemic since March, 2020, all the Courts and the tribunals which would also include RERA authority were working virtually on online mode. The High Court, however, issued the circular on 05.02.2021 for commencing the physical hearing of the trial Courts and also had notified the Standard of Operating Procedures (SOPs). 3.3 Pursuant to the said circular dated 05.02.2021, the respondent also issued a circular on 19.03.2021 since it followed the suit. However, after about a month’s time in April, 2021, realizing the increase in the number of patients infected through the COVID-19 viruses, the authority itself had issued the circular on 08.04.2021 and had declared that the hearing would be in an online mode. It has been emphasised that all the hearings had taken placed in the month of April online and on 22.04.2021, the office when had put up a note indicating steep rise in the number of persons infected with COVID-19 viruses, the respondent had suspended all online and offline hearing of April, 2021 and the said circular was uploaded on the webportal of the RERA (guj.rera.gujarat.gov.in). According to the respondents, from the webportal of RERA, it can be seen that all hearings scheduled after the said date of 22.04.2021, have been adjourned. This step was taken so as to avoid any kind of hardship to the concerned persons. The respondents are not conducting any physical hearing and also following stringently the directions issued by this Court. 4. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Vishal Dave appearing for the petitioner. He has reiteratively emphasized that for streamlining the process of virtual hearing and for safeguarding the human lives by restraining the respondents herein, the present petition has been filed in view of the worsening condition of infection in pandemic due to COVID-19. According to him, the credentials of the petitioner, who is an advocate himself writs large in the memo of petition. He has made reiterative attempts to approach the respondent authority and eventually, on realizing that he was unsuccessful in evoking any response, he has approached this Court with the prayers. According to him, the credentials of the petitioner, who is an advocate himself writs large in the memo of petition. He has made reiterative attempts to approach the respondent authority and eventually, on realizing that he was unsuccessful in evoking any response, he has approached this Court with the prayers. He further emphasized that the only circular the petitioner was aware of is of 19.03.2021 which was insisting for physical hearing and requiring the personal appearance before the authority concerned. He has pleaded ignorance with regard to the circular dated 22.04.2021 although he admits that the petitioner is a regular practitioner before the respondent authority. He emphasized that there is no other motive except to safeguard the interest of one and all and repeated requests to that effect to the respondent authority also was with a view to protect the interest of all concerned. He also further submitted that although presently the physical hearing and the hearing itself have been suspended, when the respondent authority begins the functioning in a regular mode, the virtual hearing should continue and the same be provided in the present petition itself as otherwise, the authority concerned shall turn deaf ears. 5. Learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Luvkumar for the respondents emphatically and vehemently urged that this petition in the present form requires outright rejection and the same has to be construed as having been preferred with the motive other than what has been represented. She urged that the authority has been quite conscious and alive to the need of a common man. It had continued its online hearing all through out when there was lockdown and also thereafter. It is in view of the directions issued by the High Court by the circulars and SOPs of 05.02.2021 that the Respondents had chosen to start the physical hearing instead of continuing the online hearing. She has pointed out on 22.04.2021, on noticing the newspaper report, the Secretary has communicated to the Office of the Government Pleader. She has pointed out that the 22.04.2021 circular, is in relation to all quasi judicial proceedings, which says that considering the present COVID-19 pandemic situation, and to avoid hardships to the all concerned, the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority has decided to suspend all online/offline hearing to be conducted during April, 2021. She has pointed out that the 22.04.2021 circular, is in relation to all quasi judicial proceedings, which says that considering the present COVID-19 pandemic situation, and to avoid hardships to the all concerned, the Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority has decided to suspend all online/offline hearing to be conducted during April, 2021. The next date of the hearing and mode of the hearing will be communicated to all concerned on GUJ RERA web portal (gujrera.gujarat.gov.in). She has also further urged that it is quite unlikely that the petitioner, who is a regular practitioner would not be aware of the circular of 08.04.2021 where the respondent authority itself has decided to go online and it was put up on a notice board and all those who are regularly practicing would be definitely aware of such circular. She, therefore, has urged that there would not have been any requirement for this Court to issue notice, had the correct facts been stated before this Court on 20.04.2021. It would also means huge waste of the precious time of court and therefore, she urged that not only the petition should be dismissed but, the exemplary cost needs to be imposed as preferring of PIL is not contemplated in such circumstances. 6. Having heard both the sides and also having considered the material placed before this Court, it is not in dispute that the respondent authority continued to work online during the pandemic. On 05.02.2021, this Court issued a circular for the purpose of physical opening of all District Courts and the SOPs also were prepared on 04.11.2020 to guide all the Courts in their Physical functioning. This was the time when the things were quite under the control and there was an increase in demand of restarting of the physical work at the District level. It would be fruitful to refer to the High Court circular of 05.02.2021. The Standard Operating Procedure for resumption of physical functioning also have been circulated which had been prepared and laid down on 04.11.2020. Apt would be to reproduce at this juncture the circular of the High Court dt. 05/02/2021 along with SOPs for ready reference which is as under. The Standard Operating Procedure for resumption of physical functioning also have been circulated which had been prepared and laid down on 04.11.2020. Apt would be to reproduce at this juncture the circular of the High Court dt. 05/02/2021 along with SOPs for ready reference which is as under. qq Date: 05/02/2021 Resumption of Physical Functioning of Subordinate Courts of Gujarat Considering the latest data pertaining to Corona Virus Cases in various Districts of Gujarat https://guiCOVID-19.gujarat.gov.in/ and various representations received from Bar Associations of different Court establishments at District Headquarters of Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot, Honourable High Court has been pleased to issue following directions with respect to resumption of physical functioning of Subordinate Courts at the District Headquarters of Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot w.e.f. 01.03.2021. 1. All the Subordinate Courts (except the Courts in Micro Containment Zones, if any) at District Headquarters of Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara & Rajkot shall start functioning physically with Regular Court Working Hours of 10.45 am to 06.10 pm. 2. The Subordinate Courts in Micro Containment Zones (if any) shall continue to function as per earlier Circulars/Guidelines of the High Court of Gujarat dated 26.06.2020 for carrying out Judicial work through Video Conferencing in Courts. 3. The Subordinate Courts at District Headquarters of Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara & Rajkot shall function as per regular practice 8 procedure in consonance with social distancing guidelines issued by the Central/State Government and as per the Standard Operating Procedure (SOPattached herewith) laid down by High Court of Gujarat Circular dated 04.11.2020 regarding resumption of Physical Functioning of Subordinate Courts. 4. As far as possible, the entry gates to the Court Campus or building shall be restricted to only one. The Principal Judicial Officers may have multiple entry/exit points as per the need of the Court Campus. sd/- Registrar General High Court of Gujarat HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Date: 04/11/2020 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for resumption of Physical Functioning of Subordinate Courts of Gujarat Considering the present situation in State of Gujarat, the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat is pleased to issue the following Standard Operating Procedures to be adopted for resumption of Physical Functioning of Subordinate Courts. 1. The Principal District Judge/Principal Judge should appoint a Covid officer' along with required dedicated staff to plan, oversee, execute and supervise all activities related to COVID in the each and every Court establishment. 1. The Principal District Judge/Principal Judge should appoint a Covid officer' along with required dedicated staff to plan, oversee, execute and supervise all activities related to COVID in the each and every Court establishment. The Covid officer & dedicated staff constituted to assist him shall take a round of court building every day to take stock of the situation and take all necessary appropriate steps to prevent the spread of Corona virus. 2. The entry gates to the Court campus or building shall be restricted to one only, in case of multiple entry points/gates. Further, no one should be allowed to enter in the court building without wearing a mask. Wearing of masks will be compulsory for one and all in the Court premises. 3. All entrants in the court campus, including Judicial Officers, Advocates and all employees including the contractual employees shall be subjected to thermal checks on daily basis. Those found having fever/flulike symptoms shall not be allowed to enter in the court building and be advised to take proper treatment. 4. Hand sanitizers shall be placed at the entry gates of court buildings as well as entry Gates of the Court Rooms. 5. The Principal Judicial Officer & Covid Officer in coordination with District Administration shall ensure proper cleaning and frequent sanitization of the court premises, particularly of the frequently touched surfaces like hand railings, door handles, seats, Case Filing windows, etc. Court Rooms & Building should be sanitized on daily basis post Court working hours. 6. The Principal Judicial Officer should direct the PWD/R&B Works department to install Plexiglass/Acrylic sheet between the dais of all Judicial Officers in Courts and the Sitting Space of advocates and Litigants. Similar Acrylic sheet should also be installed in Administrative Departments which have public dealings with Litigants and Advocates to ensure social distancing for one and all. 7. The Covid officer should ensure that all Courts & Administrative Offices have proper ventilation & air circulation. 8. Concerned Principal Judicial Officer/Presiding Officer should ensure that social distancing guidelines are scrupulously followed both inside and outside the Court Rooms. 9. The Court working hours should be restricted to 10:45 a.m. to 04:00 p.m. 10 . The Judicial Officer should see that litigants should not attend courts unless their presence is inevitable. 11. The entry of outside vendors & casual visitors in courts premises shall be banned completely. 12. 9. The Court working hours should be restricted to 10:45 a.m. to 04:00 p.m. 10 . The Judicial Officer should see that litigants should not attend courts unless their presence is inevitable. 11. The entry of outside vendors & casual visitors in courts premises shall be banned completely. 12. The Principal Judicial Officer should ensure sufficient quantities of mask, sanitizer, gloves, thermal scanner etc. 13. Social distancing shall be strictly maintained in the Courtrooms, Bar Rooms, Photostat Rooms etc. by rearranging the chairs and benches respectively. 14. Canteen shall serve only tea, coffee, packed food and drinking water. 15. The ATM in Court Campus, if any shall remain closed till further order. 16. The Principal Judicial Officers are directed to ensure that all the washrooms/ toilets are maintained spick and span and to provide liquid hand wash and soaps. 17. A safe distance (minimum two meters/Six Feet) shall be maintained between all stakeholders. 18. All the Judges, advocates and Court staff may be advised to take care of their own health and look out for respiratory symptoms/fever and, if feeling unwell, should leave the workplace immediately after informing their reporting officers. 19. All Judicial Officers, Advocates and court staff members be directed to download Aarogya Setu App on their mobile phones. 20. The Ld. Advocates & Litigants should avoid crowding at any spot in court premises and leave the premises as soon as their work is completed. 21. All measures shall be taken to reduce the need for the physical presence of all stakeholders within court premises and to secure the functioning of courts in consonance with social distancing guidelines issued by the Central/State Government. This SOP may be revised from time to time considering the situation of Covid Pandemic. sd/- Registrar General High Court of Gujarat 7. It appears that by taking note of the circular dated 05.02.2021 of starting the physical work in the District Court from 01.03.2021, circular came to be issued by the respondent authority which directed all concerned to remain present for offline hearing. That resulted into the communications in the form of applications under the Right to Information Act, where certain details called for, were provided to the present petitioner on 12.02.2021. We have taken the notice that there are about 19 complaints which were heard physically from 01.07.2020 to 10.01.2021. That resulted into the communications in the form of applications under the Right to Information Act, where certain details called for, were provided to the present petitioner on 12.02.2021. We have taken the notice that there are about 19 complaints which were heard physically from 01.07.2020 to 10.01.2021. However, what this Court is concerned with, is the period from 19.03.2021 when specific directions were issued by the authority to conduct the physical hearing. However, no sooner did the authority issued such directions of starting the physical hearing, then suddenly in the month of April, 2021 arose the number of persons infected with COVID-19 viruses and therefore, the circular came up on 08.04.2021 making it quite categorical that all hearings shall take place through online and in a virtual mode. The scheduled of hearing was also made limited since 08.04.2021 on account of the present situation of COVID-19 pandemic. We given to understand that this was put up on the website of the RERA authority and therefore, would be not to one and all. Thereafter on 22.04.2021, it has once again come out with the circular suspending all online/offline hearing of April, 2021 and the said circular also has been uploaded on the web portal of the GUJ RERA. It is quite obvious from the chronology of the events that in view of the directions issued by this Court for starting the physical hearing the trial Courts that the physical hearing had been initiated by the respondent authority. It also had followed the SOPs issued on 04.11.2020 by the High Court for resumption of the District Court. Although there are couple of communications which have been addressed to the RERA authority by the petitioner, which had not been directly answered by the authority concerned but that may not be ground for the Court too. Even otherwise, it has chosen to on his own to decide to switch over to online hearing on 08.04.2021, this already has come up on website and which unequivocally sends the message to one and all to avoid any hardship during the pandemic,thus, without any semblance of doubt, it emerges on the record that the authority concerned has chosen to make it online all the hearings by responding to the need of an hour, without waiting for any further directions. Under the circumstances, there could not have been any reason, much less substantial and cogent, for the petitioner to approach this Court and insist on any issuance of notice. Assuming that, at the time of filing this petition on 2/4/2021, there was no such decision from the authority concerned, on 08.04.2021, not only a categorical decision is taken, but, the same has been already been made known to all concerned by uploading the same. It is emphatically placed before us that the circular of 08.04.2021 of conducting online hearings is already put up on a notice board and the same had been uploaded on the website of the GUJ RERA on 08.04.2021 itself. Therefore, there was no need or requirement or insistence for this Court to adjudicate this matter or to give any kind of directions when the authority has reflected the requisite concern and responded to the need by making it online. The petitioner ought to have brought this particular aspect to the notice of the court at the time of issuance of notice. In fact, in a response to the specific query raised by the court also as to whether the Respondents by then had not already acted upon the repeated requests of the petitioner of switching over to online mode, answer was of not having any input in this regard. A little vigilance would have saved much time and many resources. A well intended initiative also needs matching preparedness and correctness over facts and due safeguarding against over zealousness. A word of caution is necessary, noticing the chronology of the events since the petitioner himself is a practitioner with the respondent Tribunal and it is quite unlikely that he would be unaware of the subsequent developments of 08.04.2021 and 22.04.2021. At this stage Mr. Dave has insisted that the petitioner has preferred this PIL with a bonafide intent and was simply unaware when the present petition proceeded on issuance of notice about such circulars of online hearing, without questioning his intent and without any scrutiny on such a stand of his being oblivious, we could surely opine that with a little endeavor, the petitioner could have known this easily for sure with everything being posted on the website and hence, this petition would warrant disposal, noticing his standing at bar and his other credentials, only with the word of a caution for the future. 8. 8. The concern at this juncture is expressed by the learned advocate Mr. Dave that the respondent authority although presently has chosen to conduct the virtual hearing in its circular dated 08.04.2021 and of course, the hearing of all matters has been suspended till the situation of pandemic is under control, when the actual working of the tribunal restarts, there may be a difficulty once again and therefore also, the directions would be necessary. 9. As rightly pointed out to this court by the learned Government Pleader, Ms. Shah, the Tribunal has been stringently following the directions of the High Court and that is quite eloquent from its initiating offline hearing after the Court directed on 05.02.2021 by a circular the restarting of physical hearing of the District Court and also from its subsequently having corrected its stand on realizing the current dangerous proportion of trend of infection in the State and in the Country due to COVID-19 viruses. Thus, there is no requirement of this Court to direct anything in that regard prejudging any issue. It is a quasi judicial authority which is always expected to discharge its obligations on administrative side with requisite sensitivity and respond maturely while dealing with the issues concerning litigants, lawyers and people at large. Resultantly, this Petition is disposed of, discharging the notice, in the above terms.