Archive · 17 Sep 2026
Rajasthan High Court Calls Judicial Infrastructure Constitutional Duty
The Rajasthan High Court said courts need safe buildings and proper facilities to do their jobs.
It said the government should not treat these facilities as a special favour.
The court was looking at problems in its main building in Jodhpur.
An earlier opinion warned that the building’s Central Dome could collapse.
A later IIT Bombay report said the building could be repaired.
The report said about 40% of the building needed urgent work.
Repairs are expected to take two years and cost about Rs 117.65 crore.
The court also wants the state to plan more courtrooms so people can receive justice more effectively.
The Rajasthan High Court said judicial infrastructure is a constitutional necessity, not government favour or executive discretion.
The court was examining structural concerns at the high court’s principal seat in Jodhpur, including its 21-metre-high Central Dome.
An IIT Bombay final report said the building was repairable, although nearly 40% required urgent attention.
Phased rehabilitation is expected to take 24 months and cost an estimated Rs 117.65 crore.
The court ordered immediate restoration efforts and directed the state to process plans for 50 additional courtrooms, extendable to 60.
- Who
- The Rajasthan High Court bench of Chief Justice Sanjay K Agrawal and Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur, along with the Rajasthan state administration.
- What
- The court rebuked the state over judicial infrastructure and ordered immediate restoration work at its Jodhpur building.
- When
- The court took cognisance on August 10, heard the matter again on August 24, and considered the state’s September 15 response; the next hearing is scheduled for October 5.
- Where
- The principal seat of the Rajasthan High Court in Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
- Why
- Structural concerns, including warnings about the Central Dome, prompted the proceedings; the court said adequate infrastructure is necessary for access to justice and the judiciary’s constitutional functions.
Court’s Position
State’s Response
Status of judicial infrastructure
Court’s Position
The court said infrastructure is an institutional and constitutional requirement, not executive largesse or a discretionary government expense.
State’s Response
The state outlined sanctioned funding, phased rehabilitation, appointed supervision teams and steps to address the building’s condition.
Financial constraints
Court’s Position
The bench said financial considerations cannot justify perpetually denying or inadequately providing basic facilities needed for judicial functions.
State’s Response
The state’s response detailed the estimated Rs 117.65 crore rehabilitation cost and the amounts sanctioned or under process for the project phases.
Building safety and repairs
Court’s Position
The court acted after an opinion warned that the Central Dome could collapse and ordered immediate restoration measures.
State’s Response
The state cited a later IIT Bombay final report concluding that the building was repairable, with proper work expected to extend its residual life by at least 20 years.
- Building concern
- The Central Dome is approximately 21 metres high.
- Earlier structural warning
- An IIT Bombay opinion recorded by the court said the dome was in imminent danger of collapse.
- Repair assessment
- A September 3 final report found the building repairable and said recommended work could extend its residual life by at least 20 years, subject to proper execution, materials and maintenance.
- Urgent work
- Nearly 40% of the building requires urgent attention; the remaining areas also need repairs and preventive measures.
- Rehabilitation plan
- Phased work covering 11,000, 12,000 and 10,000 square metres, plus preventive maintenance over 33,000 square metres, is expected to take 24 months.
- Estimated cost
- The rehabilitation is estimated to cost Rs 117.65 crore.
- Additional courtrooms
- The state was directed to process a proposal for an extended building with 50 courtrooms, expandable by another 10.