A request for an adjournment from attorney-general R. Venkataramani on Thursday appeared to annoy Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, who suggested the law officer was trying to avoid his bench, aware that he would retire on November 23.

“We have accommodated you twice already. How much more time do you want?” Justice Gavai told additional solicitor-general Aishwarya Bhati when she sought an adjournment till Monday, saying Venkataramani was busy with an international arbitration.

“If you want it after November 24, tell us frankly. It is very unfair to the court that every time you seek accommodation for international arbitration.”

On November 3, too, when Venkataramani had asked that the case be referred to a five-judge bench, the court had raised the question whether this was an attempt at avoiding Justice Gavai’s bench.

The matter relates to the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Act, 2021, which governs the appointments, tenures and service conditions of tribunal members, both judicial and administrative. Among other things, the act curtails the members’ tenures from five years to four.

The Madras Bar Association has challenged the 2021 act saying it replicates an earlier ordinance that a five-judge bench had struck down as unconstitutional, ruling it impinged on the independence of tribunals, which are quasi-judicial bodies.

The matter was to be heard on Friday. When Bhati pleaded that it be argued on Monday, Justice Gavai said: “When do we write the judgment? This week also we cannot write the judgment. We thought we can do it on Saturday and Sunday.”

Bhati tried to impress on the bench that Venkataramani was genuinely busy.

“Every day we are told that he is busy with arbitration…. You have a battery of lawyers and then you file midnightapplications seeking reference to larger benches!” Justice Gavai said.

“When we were (lawyers) in the high court, whatever briefs we had to give upwhen we had to come here.We had the highest regard for the highest constitutional court. We did not take any other cases….”

The bench, which included Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi, cited how Venkataramani’s November 3 plea had been turned down.

On that day, Justice Gavai had cautioned Venkataramani that it was not proper to seek a reference of the matter to a five-judge bench when the apex court had alreadyheard arguments over the past one month on behalf ofthe petitioner.

The court had at the time warned that it would reject the Centre’s application and make the adverse observation that the government was trying to avoid the bench headed by Justice Gavai.

On Thursday, while refusing to adjourn the matter, the bench gave Venkataramani a partial concession.

It said senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing the bar association, would argue the case on Friday and the attorney-general could appear on Monday.

If he did not turn up on Monday, the court would “close” the arguments and reserve its verdict, the bench said.