8/11/2015 untitled page [doj.gov.in] · 8/11/2015 untitled page...

8/11/2015 Untitled Page

data:text/html;charset=utf8,%3Ca%20name%3D%22%23top%22%20style%3D%22textdecoration%3A%20underline%3B%20color%3A%20rgb(0%2C%200… 1/2

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO 20

ANSWERED ON 22.11.2012

VACANT POST OF JUDGES

20 . Ramasubbu Shri S.

Agarwal Shri Jai Prakash

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether about 25 percent posts of High Court Judges are lying vacant in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof including the total number of sanctioned posts and the existingstrength of Judges in the Supreme Court of India and in various High Courts in the country,Courtwise and the reasons for the delay in filling up of the vacancies;

(c) whether the Government has taken any steps to fill the vacant posts and to reduce thependency of cases thereof; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DR. ASHWANI KUMAR)

(a) to (d) : A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

Statement referred to in reply to parts (a) to (d) of the Lok Sabha Starred Question No.20 foranswer on 22.11.2012.

(a) and (b): A Statement showing details of approved strength, working strength and vacanciesthereof as on 01.11.2012 is given at Annex.I.

(c)and (d): Pursuant to the Supreme Court Judgement of October 6, 1993 read with theirAdvisory Opinion of October 28, 1998,the process of initiation of proposal for appointment of aJudge of the Supreme Court rests with Chief Justice of India andfor the appointment of a Judgeof the High Court rests with the Chief Justice of that High Court.Filling up of the vacancies in theHigh Courts is a continuous consultative process among Constitutional authorities to selectsuitable candidates for higher judiciary. It is time consuming process, as it requires consultationand approval from various Constitutional authorities. While every effort is made to fill up theexisting vacancies expeditiously, vacancies do keep on arising on account of retirement,resignation or elevation of Judges.

Disposal of pending cases in various courts is within the domain of the judiciary. However, with aview to judiciary in addressing the problem of pendency of cases, the Central Government hasset up a National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms in August 2011. With the twinobjectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancingaccountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities.The Mission will be pursuing a coordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears andpendency in judicial administration which, inter alia, involve better infrastructure for courtsincluding computerisation, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislativemeasures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, reengineering of court procedure for quickdisposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. The National Mission has atime frame of five years (201116) to pursue these initiatives.

During the short span of its existence, the Mission has taken several steps in the strategic areastowards fulfillment of its objectives. A Constitution Amendment Bill for raising the retirement ageof High Court Judges is before the Parliament. A comprehensive proposal has been formulatedfor constitution of All India Judicial Service. An InterMinisterial Group (IMG) has been



constituted to suggest necessary amendments to the Negotiable Instruments Act along withother policy and administrative measures to check increasing litigation relating to cheque bouncecases.

An important aspect of the judicial reforms relates to reengineering court procedures and courtprocesses for early disposal of cases. A National Court Management System has been notified bythe Hon’ble Supreme Court for addressing the issues of case management, court management,setting measurable standards for performance of the courts and the National System of JudicialStatistics in the country. A Sub Group on improving the court procedure and court processes forbetter criminal justice system has been constituted under the Chairman, Law Commission tosuggest necessary changes in this regard.

Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary is a major thrust area for the NationalMission. With a view to enhancing the resources of the State Governments, the Government hasincreased the Central Share by revising the funding pattern from 50:50 to 75:25 (for Statesother than North Eastern States) under modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary with effect from 201112 onwards. The fundingpattern for NorthEastern States has however, been kept at 90:10 w.e.f 201011.

Rs.595 crore has been released as central assistance to States / UTs for infrastructuredevelopment of subordinate judiciary in 201112. A budget provision of Rs. 660 crore has beenmade in the current financial year. Of this Rs.492 crore has already been released to States /UTs upto 31st October, 2012.

On the basis of pendency reduction drive from July, 2011 to December, 2011 in which totalpendency was reduced by over 6 lakh cases, a similar drive has been undertaken this year alsofrom July to December, 2012. The main focus of pendency reduction drive this year is to makeour judicial system free of cases more than five (5) years old. Simultaneously, emphasis is beinglaid on increasing the number of judges in subordinate judiciary by filling the existing vacanciesand creating additional posts so that disposal of cases is expedited and there is reduction inoverall pendency.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO 75


PETITIONS FILED IN COURTS

75 . Aaron Rashid Shri J.M.


(a) the number of special leave petitions and appeals, civil and criminal relating to the categoriesof labour laws, matrimonial, rent control, labour, service, land acquisition filed in the Hon’bleSupreme Court of India during the period 2009 to 31 March, 2012.

(b) the number of civil and criminal cases relating to levy recovery and interpretations of taxlaws, pertaining to both (State and Central Government) filed in the Supreme Court by theCentral and State Governments as well as Public Sector Undertakings and big corporate housesduring the said period; and

(c) the number of such cases as mentioned in

(a) and

(b) above disposed off by the Hon’ble Apex Court during the period 2009 to 31March, 2012?

ANSWER


(a)to(c):The information is being collected and will be laid on the Table of the House.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



INFORMATION PANEL

104 . Patasani Dr. (Prof.) Prasanna Kumar

Ray Shri Rudramadhab


(a) Whether the Government plans to appoint only former Supreme Court and High Court Judgesas information panel heads as opined by Supreme Court;

(b) if so, the reaction of the Government thereto; and

(c) the reasons therefor?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DR.ASHWANI KUMAR)

(a)to(c):Honourable Supreme Court in its judgement dated 13.9.2012 in WP(c) No.210/2012Namit Sharma Vs UOI has pronounced that the Information Commissions at the respective levelsshall henceforth work in Benches of two members each. One of them being a ‘judicial member’,while the other an ‘expert member’. The judicial member should be a person possessing a degreein law, having a judicially trained mind and experience in performing judicial functions. A lawofficer or a lawyer may also be eligible provided he is a person who has practiced law at least fora period of twenty years as on the date of the advertisement. Such lawyer should also haveexperience in social work. The Supreme Court has further held that they are of the consideredview that the competent authority should prefer a person who is or has been a Judge of the HighCourt for appointment as Information Commissioners. Further, Chief Information Commissionerat the Centre or State level shall only be a person who is or has been a Chief Justice of the HighCourt or a Judge of the Supreme Court of India.

A review petition has been filed in the Supreme Court against the judgement. The case is listedfor curative and review on 20.11.2012 by circulation. Honourable Court has also been requestedfor oral hearing.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



PENDING RAPE CASES

114 . Acharia Shri Basudeb

Bauri Smt. Susmita


(a) the details of number of rape cases in various High Courts and Supreme Court pending allover the country till date, Statewise; and

(b) the details of number of cases disposed off till date?

ANSWER


(a) & (b): Information is being collected and will be laid on the Table of the House.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



UNCLE JUDGES SYNDROME

142 . Rajendran Shri C.


(a) whether the Law Commission in its 230th Report had asked the Law Ministry to ensure‘UncleJudges’ Syndrome is eliminated;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) the action taken/proposed to be taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) and (b):The Law Commission of India in their 230th Report has mentioned the matter ofappointment of ‘Uncle Judges’ in the High Courts, wherein it is said that the Judges, whose kithand kin are practising in a High Court, should not be appointed in the same High Court.

(c):The appointment of Judges in the High Court and Supreme Court is made under theMemorandum for Appointment of Judges which has been laid down following the Supreme CourtJudgements in 1993 and 1998. Under this, responsibility for initiation of proposals forappointment of Judges in the High Court and Supreme Court is with the Chief Justice of the HighCourts/Supreme Court. Under Article 217 of the Constitution, a person who has been anadvocate for 10 years in a High Court or in two or more such Courts in succession, is qualified tobe considered for appointment as the Judge of the High Court.

Thus, under the Constitutional Provision, Chief Justice can recommend judges from the Bar to beappointed as the judge of the High Court. In this situation, kith and kin of those appointed asjudges and practicing in the High Court is likely. With a view to correct the situation, judicialstandards are being prescribed for the judges in the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill,2012 which has been passed by Lok Sabha already.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



NATIONAL ARREAR GRID

86 . Lal Shri Kirodi


(a) whether National Arrears Grid has been established under ecourts project;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) if not, the reasons therefor and the time by which the grid is likely to be established includingthe action taken by the Government in this regard; and

(d) the manner in which the aforesaid Grid would monitor arrears and judicial data?

ANSWER


(a)to(d): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO THE LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. 86 TO BEANSWERED ON 29.11.2012 REGARDING NATIONAL ARREAR GRID ASKED BY DR. KIRODI LALMEENA, MP

(a) to (c) : The National Arrears Grid which is rechristened as National Judicial Data Grid(NJDG), is targeted to be established by December, 2013. The essential prerequisites before theNJDG is made functional, are computerization of 14,249 district / subordinate courts approvedunder the eCourts Project, completion of backlog data entry, establishment of connectivitythrough Wide Area Network (WAN), development of Functional Requirement Specifications(FRS) and Business Intelligence (BI) tools to decide the information which would be madeavailable in the public domain. National Informatics Centre (NIC) as the implementing agencyand the eCommitee of the Supreme Court are working on all these aspects. In fact, NIC hasalready installed 50 virtual machines at its National Data Centre for the NJDG.

(d) : The NJDG will provide the Indian Judiciary a web portal with real time data of arrears inevery court in the country, which will empower them to monitor / analyse the arrears; providetimely inputs for policy decisions to reduce delay and arrears in the justice delivery system; andfacilitate better monitoring of court performance and better resource management.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



FAST TRACK COURTS

96 . Mahendrasinh Shri Chauhan

Gandhi Smt. Maneka Sanjay


(a) the present status of the Fast Track Courts in the country;

(b) the number of Fast Track Courts functioning in the country as on 31 December, 2011, Statewise;

(c) the total funds allocated for such Courts during the last three years and the current year,Statewise;

(d) the details of the achievements made by these courts including the number of casestransferred and disposed of during the said period, Statewise; and

(e) whether the Government has any proposal to set up evening courts in the country and if so,the details thereof including the time by which such courts are likely to be set up in the country?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE (DR. ASHWANI KUMAR)

(a) to (e): A statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (e) OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTIONNO. 96 REGARDING FAST TRACK COURTS FOR ANSWER ON 29TH NOVEMBER 2012

(a) The Central Government had provided financial assistance to the State Governments for FastTrack Courts from 200001 to 201011. The scheme has not been extended beyond31/03/2011. However, some of the State Governments have continued the Fast Track Courtsbeyond 31/03/2011 from their own funds.

In its judgement in Brij Mohan Lal vs Union of India & Others on 19.04.2012, the Supreme Courthas directed the States that they shall not take a decision to continue the Fast Track Courtsscheme on an adhoc and temporary basis. They (States) will need to decide either to bring theFast Track Courts scheme to an end or to continue the same as a permanent feature in the State.

(b) The number of Fast Track Courts functioning in the country as on 31 March, 2011 is atAnnexI.

(c) Central funds for Fast Track Courts were released upto 31st March 2011. Statewise detailsof central funds released for such Courts during the three years 200809, 200910 and 201011are at AnnexII.

(d) The Statewise number of cases transferred to Fast Track Courts, disposed of by these courtsand pending in these courts is at AnnexIII.

(e) An amount of Rs. 2500 crores has been allocated under Thirteenth Finance commissionaward for increasing the number of court working hours using the existing infrastructure byholding morning/evening/shift courts.Based on the information received from States, the Statusof Physical and Financial Progress in respect of Morning / Evening / Shift Courts upto 31stOctober,2012, is at AnnexIV.

8/11/2015 Annex

http://164.100.47.132/Annexture_New/lsq15/12/as96.htm 1/5

AnnexI

Statement referred to in reply to part (b) of Lok Sabha Starred Question No. 96for 29/11/2012

SLNo.

Name of the state Number of Fast TrackCourts functioning as on31 March, 2011

1 2 31 Andhra Pradesh 1082 Arunachal Pradesh 33 Assam 204 Bihar 1795 Chhattisgarh 256 Goa 57 Gujarat * 618 Haryana ** 69 Himachal Pradesh 910 Jharkhand 3911 Karnataka # 8712 Kerala 3813 Madhya Pradesh ** 8414 Maharashtra * 5115 Manipur 216 Meghalaya 317 Mizoram 318 Nagaland 219 Odisha 3520 Punjab ** 1521 Rajasthan 8322 Tamil Nadu $ 4923 Tripura 324 Uttar Pradesh 15325 Uttarakhand 2026 West Bengal 109

Total 1192

* as on February,2011

** as on December, 2010

8/11/2015 Annex


# as on August 2010

$ as on December, 2008

AnnexII

Statement referred to in reply to part (c) of Lok Sabha StarredQuestion No. 96 for 29/11/2012 Central Grants released to

States for Fast Track Courts from 200809 to 201011(^ In lakh)

SI.

No.

Name of the State 200809 200910 201011

1 2 3 4 51 Andhra Pradesh 142,40 1096.002 Arunachal Pradesh 14.40 14.40 14.403 Assam 91.20 96.00 96.004 Bihar 720.00 720.00 72O.0O5 Chhattisgarh 148.80 148.80 129.606 Goa 19.20 14.40 24.007 Gujarat 580.80 777.608 Haryana 38.40 76.80 67.209 Himachal Pradesh 38.40 43.20 43.2010 Jharkhand 249.60 196.80 192.0011 Karnataka 182.40 446.40 441.6012 Kerala 148.80 148.80 148.8013 Madhya Pradesh 312.00 316.80 316.8014 Maharashtra 417.60 412.80 537.6015 Manipur 9.60 9.60 9.6016 Meghalaya 28.80 28.8017 Mizoram 14.40 14.40 14.4018 Nagaland 9.60 9.60 9.6019 Odisha 158.40 168.00 168.0020 Punjab 0 163.20 81.6021 Rajasthan 398.40 398.40 398.4022 Tamil Nadu 0 470.40 235.2023 Tripura 0 11.56 0

24 Uttar Pradesh 1161.60 1161.60 1094.400

8/11/2015 Annex


25 Uttarakhand 99.6226 West Bengal 571.20 571.20 571.20

Total 5456.00 5613.16 7315.62

AnnexIll

Statement referred to in reply to part (d) of Lok Sabha Starred

Question No. 96 for 29/11/2012

SLNO. NAME OF THE STATES TOTAL CASES

TRANSFERREDAS ON31/3/2011

TOTAL CASESDISPOSED ASON 31/3/2011

NO. OF CASES

PENDING ASON 31/3/2011

1 2 3 4 51 ANDHRA PRADESH 236928 199953 369752 ARUNACHAL PRADESH 4162 1660 25023 ASSAM 72191 55811 163804 BIHAR 239278 159105 801735 CHHATTISGARH 94670 76575 180956 GUJARAT * 537636 434296 1033407 GOA 5096 4017 10793 H ARYAN A ** 38359 33590 47699 HIMACHAL PRADESH 40126 33427 669910 JHARKHAND 110027 87789 2223811 KARNATAKA # 218402 184067 3433512 KERELA 109160 95367 1379313 MADHYA PRADESH ** 360602 317363 4323914 MAHARASHTRA * 423518 381619 4189915 MAN1PUR 3059 2861 19816 MEGHALAYA 1031 843 18817 MIZORAM 1868 1635 23318 NAGALAND 845 716 12919 ODISHA 66199 60441 575820 PUNJAB ** 58570 46347 1222321 RAJASTHAN 149447 123024 2642322 TAMIL NADU $ 411957 371336 40621

23 TRIPURA 5812 5591 22124 UTTARAKHAND 98797 89791 900625 UTTAR PRADESH 464775 411658 5311726 WEST BENGAL 146083 113903 32180 TOTAL 3898598 3292785 605813

8/11/2015 Annex


* as on February,2011** as on December 2010

# as on August, 2010

$ as on December, 2008

AnnexIV

Statement referred to in reply to part (e) of Lok Sabha StarredQuestion No. 96 for 29/11/2012

i

Physical and Financial Progress of Morning / Evening / Shift Courts

(As on 315t October.2012)

State i , _

i

FinancialProgress ? inCrores

Physical Progress InNumbers

Andhra Pradesh 43.55

ArunachalPradesh

10.63

Assam 9.06 48Bihar 64.30 38Chhattisgarh 10.91 Goa 1.54 Gujarat 48.35 Haryana 18.48 55Himachal Pradesh 7,90 Jammu &Kashmir

9.78

Jharkhand 16.52

Karnataka

Kerala 20.23 5Madhya Pradesh 61.47 Maharashtra 89.27 399Manipur 1.07

Meghalaya 0.31 Mizoram 1.88 Nagaland 0.85

24.98 198

8/11/2015 Annex


OdishaPunjab 16.28 46Rajasthan 38.80 Sikkim 0.41

Tamil Nadu 24.71 3Tripura 3.76 135Uttar Pradesh 102.25

Uttarakhand 12.84 5West Bengal 32.83 Total 713.97 1139



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CHILD WITNESS COURT ROOM

97 . Shetkar Shri Suresh Kumar


(a) whether the first child witness court room, has been opened recently in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof including its aims and objectives;

(c) whether the Union Government proposes to assist the States to open such court rooms inother parts of the country; and

(d) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) to (d): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) TO (d) OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTIONNO. 97

(a) to (d): The first Child Witness Court Room in Delhi was inaugurated on 16th September,2012 at Karkardooma Court Complex. It aims to ensure compliance with child friendly procedurefor investigation, trail and examination as per directives in judicial pronouncements as well aswith recently enacted provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The Central Government has been extending financial assistance to States for augmenting theirresources for infrastructure development of subordinate judiciary under a Centrally SponsoredScheme. The design, level of facilities in court complexes including those for sensitive witnesseslike children, women and handicapped persons are finalized by the State Governments inconsultation with respective High Courts.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF ST COMMUNITY AS JUDGES IN COURTS

940 . Dhurve Jyoti

Naranbhai Shri Kachhadia


(a) the sanctioned strength and actual strength of judges in High Courts and the Supreme Court,SC,ST, OBC and General, categorywise;

(b) whether the members of ST community have not been appointed as judges in the SupremeCourt and High Court;

(c) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor; and

(d) the steps being/proposed to be taken to fill all the vacancies pertaining to ST category,expeditiously?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : A Statement showing the sanctioned strength and actual strength of judges in HighCourts and the Supreme Court as on 23.11.2012, is at Annex. Appointment of Judges of theSupreme Court and High Courts is made under Articles 124 and 217 of the Constitution of Indiarespectively, which do not provide for reservation for any caste or class of persons. TheGovernment has, however, requested the Chief Justices of the High Courts to send proposals forappointment of Judges from suitable candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, ScheduledTribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities and from amongst women.

8/11/2015 Annex

http://164.100.47.132/Annexture_New/lsq15/12/au940.htm 1/1

Annex

Annex referred to in reply to parts (a) to (d) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.940 for answeron 29.11.2012

SI.No. Name of the Court

SanctionedStrength

WorkingStrength

Vacancy ofJudges

A. Supreme Court of India 31 25 6B. High Court1 Allahabad 160 86 742 Andhra Pradesh 49 31 183 Bombay 75 55 204 Calcutta 58 41 175 Chhattisgarh 18 12 066 Delhi 48 35 137 Gauhati 24 23 018 Gujarat 42 31 119 Himachal Pradesh 11 11 10 Jammu & Kashmir 14 07 0711 Jharkhand 20 11 0912 Karnataka 50 37 1313 Kerala 38 30 0814 Madhya Pradesh 43 32 1115 Madras 60 50 1016 Orissa 22 12 1017 Patna 43 36 0718 Punjab& Haryana 68 42 2619 Rajasthan 40 22 1820 Sikkim 03 02 0121 Uttarakhand 09 08 01

Total 895 614 281



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



ECOURT

952 . Vijayan Shri A.K.S.

Pradhan Shri Nityananda


(a) the present status of the ecourts project in the country;

(b) the allocation in this regard during the last three years and the current year, Statewise andyear wise;

(c) the number of courts in the country that have been already computerised; and

(d) the time by which all the Courts in the country are likely to be computerised, State Wise andthe steps taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) The eCourts Mission Mode Project envisages the computerization of 14,249 district andsubordinate courts by 31st March 2014; upgrading the Information and CommunicationTechnology (ICT) infrastructure of the Supreme Court and the State High Courts in the country.As on 31st October 2012, 11,165 district & subordinate courts have been computerised. Statewise details of computerization are at Annex I. The balance 3,084 district and subordinate courtswould be computerized by 31st March, 2014.

Rs.935 crores are allocated for the eCourts project, of which year wise expenditure is as under:

In Rs. Crores

Financial Year 2009‐10 20010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 (upto Oct 2012)

Expenditure 65.00 120.00 90.00 28.98

Computerisation of 14,249 district / subordinate courts has been approved by the competentauthority after taking into account the number of courts in the country as they existed on 20thJuly 2010. Since then, a number of new courts have been added at the district / subordinatelevel in the country. The newly set up courts would be either computerised by the High Courtswith funding support from the respective State Government or would be included in the nextphase of the eCourts project post 2014.

8/11/2015 ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO


ANNEXURE REFERRED TO IN REPLY OF LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO.952

Annex 1

Software Installation Status : 11,165 Courts

S.No. High Court No. of Courts

No. of Courts No. ofCourts approved for Computerised ** computerisation

1 Allahabad 2,053 1,9182 Andhra Pradesh 937 5823 Bombay 1,843 1,9794 Calcutta 759 7705 Chhattisgarh 313 1826 Delhi* 303 7 Gauhati 378 3188 Gujarat 800 7089 Jammu & Kashmir 172 13110 Jharkhand 532 35011 Karnataka 773 56812 Kerala 402 25213 Madhya Pradesh 1,018 78014 Madras 779 46315 Orissa 399 37816 Patna 1,060 15617 Punjab & Haryana 589 66418 Rajasthan 789 69119 Shimla 108 10020 Sikkim 10 821 Uttarakhand 232 167

Total 14,249 11,165

*Courts computerised through other projects, not through eCourts.

** Hardware, LAN connectivity and application software is installed at these courts. There are

some courts mainly under the jurisdiction of Bombay High Court where existing infrastructure

is used as these courts were already computerized earlier.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



USE OF GUJARATI LANGUAGE IN HIGH COURT

1026. Pathak Shri Harin


(a) the action taken by the Government in connection with the proposal of the Government ofGujarat to authorize the use of Gujarati language in the proceedings of the Hon’ble High Court ofGujarat: and

(b) the time by which a final decision is likely to be taken in the matter?

ANSWER


(a) & (b) : The proposal of the Government of Gujarat to authorize the use of Gujarati languagein the proceedings of the High Court of Gujarat and similar proposals regarding use of Tamil andHindi in the proceedings of the Madras and Chhattisgarh High Courts respectively, were allreferred to the Supreme Court of India for the views of the Chief Justice of India.

As per the decision of the competent authority in its meeting held on 21.5.1965, comments ofthe Chief Justice of India are necessary before the Department of Official Language in Ministry ofHome Affairs could consider such proposals. The Chief Justice of India has intimated that theproposals regarding use of Hindi, Tamil and Gujarati in the High Courts of Chhattisgarh, Madrasand Gujarat respectively have been considered by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of India inthe meeting held on 11.10.2012. The Full Court, after due deliberations, has decided not toaccept the proposals and have reiterated the earlier similar Resolutions of the Full Court of theSupreme Court adopted on 07.05.1997 and 15.10.1999. The decision of Supreme Court hasbeen conveyed to the Department of Official Language in Ministry of Home Affairs.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



BENCH OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

1058. Chaudhary Shri Jayant

Chauhan Raj Kumari


(a) whether Uttar Pradesh has one of the highest number of pending cases in its High Court;

(b) if so, the regionwise data on the pending cases in the State;

(c) whether there is any proposal to create a bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UttarPradesh;

(d) if so, the details thereof;

(e) whether there is a proposal to implement the recommendations of the Justice Jaswant SinghCommission report of 1985 on having High Court benches away from their principal place; and

(f) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) and (b): As per the information made available by the High Courts, out of nearly 43.22 lakhcases pending in various High Courts in the country, 10.05 lakh cases were pending in AllahabadHigh Court as on 31.12.2011. The details of pending cases in the High Court are not maintainedregionwise.

(c) to (f) : The setting up of a Bench of a High Court away from its principal seat is considered bythe Centra! Government on receipt of a complete proposal, in terms of Section 51 (2) of theState Reorganization Act, 1956, from the State Government concerned. This has to have theconsent of the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Governor of the State. Besides, it has tosatisfy the broad guidelines and criteria recommended by the Justice Jaswant SinghCommission. There is no proposal from the Government of Uttar Pradesh for creation of a benchof Allahabad High Court in Western Uttar Pradesh.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



JUDICIAL OFFICERS ON DEPUTATION

1070. Bishnoi Shri Kuldeep

Aaron Rashid Shri J.M.

Ramasubbu Shri S.


(a) whether a less number of Judicial Officers of various States are working in Supreme Court,High Court and Central Government on deputation basis:


(c) whether the Government proposes to create a separate cadre of Judicial Service on thepattern of I.A.S., I.P.S. and other allied services in the country; and


ANSWER


(a) & (b) : Under Article 235 of the Constitution of India, the administrative control over themembers of district and subordinate judiciary in the States vests with the respective High Court.Further, in exercise of powers conferred under proviso to Article 309 read with Articles 233 and234 of the Constitution, the respective State Government frames the Rules and Regulations inconsultation with the High Court. The members of the State Judicial Service are governed bythem.The issues of appointment, promotion, deputation etc. of judicial officers in thedistrict/subordinate courts are decided by the respective State Government under the Rules andRegulations. The information relating to deputation of Judicial Officers from various States, is notmaintained by the Central Government.

(c) & (d) : The creation of All India Judicial Service has been recommended as far back as 1958by the Law Commission of India in its 14th Report (1958), in the 77th Report (1978) and 116thReport (1986). The Supreme Court of India has vide its judgment of 13.11.1991 in the matter ofAll India Judges Association versus Union of India and others also recommended for setting upAll India Judicial Service, which they again reiterated later in their judgment of 24.11.1993 inthe same case. The issue has also been considered and recommended by the First NationalJudicial Pay Commission (FNJPC). The Committee on CentreState Relations has alsorecommended creation of AIJS in 2010. Several concerned bodies and organizations, judicial andlegislative Committees of the Parliament have also recommended setting up of an AIJS.

A comprehensive proposal has been formulated for constitution of All India Judicial Service(AIJS). The proposal has been considered and approved by Committee of Secretaries in itsmeeting held on 05th November, 2012. It will next be placed before the competent authority forapproval.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



NATIONAL CRIME RECORDS BUREAU

1071. Ganeshamurthi Shri A.

Gaikwad Shri Eknath Mahadeo

Chitthan Shri N.S.V.

Paranjpe Shri Anand Prakash

Bapurao Shri Khatgaonkar Patil Bhaskarrao


(a) the total number of under trials in the country till the end of 2011 as per National Crimerecords Bureau, Statewise and the reason for the backlog of under trials awaiting verdict;

(b) whether the Government proposes to bring out judicial reform in this connection; and

(c) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a)to(c) The number of under trials in the country till the end of 2011 as per National CrimeRecords Bureau, Statewise, is at Annex. The undertrial prisoners are generally illiterate andunaware of their rights. They are not aware of the charges they face nor are they able to accessthe documents relating to the case. Adequate provisions have been made in the CriminalProcedure Code in this regard. Section436 provides for release of an indigent person onpersonal bond, Section436 (A) provides for a right to the undertrial to seek bail once he/shehas served one half of the maximum sentence and Section167 provides for the release of theundertrial on bail in c»se the investigation is not completed within the stipulated time. What isrequired is the need to take steps to generate awareness among the undertrials about theirrights. There is also a need to ensure that the statutory provisions are followed by judiciary andthe police for compliance so that the undertrials do not languish in jails. The Ministry of Law &Justice has requested Chief Justices of all the High Courts as well as the Chief Ministers to devisetheir own strategies and undertake a programme in Mission Mode for reducing the number ofundertrials cases and to ease congestion in jails.

8/11/2015 Annex


Annex

Statement referred to in reply to part (a) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1071 for29/11/2012

STATE/UTWISE DISTRIBUTION OF UNDERTRIAL PRISONERS IN DIFFERENT JAILSATTHEENDOF2011

SL.NO.

STATE/UT CENTRALJAIL

DISTRICTJAJL

SUBJAtL

WOMENJAIL

BORSTALSCHOOL

OPENJAIL

SPECIALJAIL OTHERS TOTAL

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 0) (10) (11)1 ANDHRA PRADESH 3194 2179 3028 143 0 0 0 0 8544

2 ARUNACHAL PRADESH 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 49

3 ASSAM 1992 2875 73 0 0 0 126 0 5066

4 BiHAR 6384 14155 2614 22 0 0 242 0 23417

5 CHHATTISGARH 4394 2743 1138 0 0 0 0 0 8275

6 GOA 3 0 282 0 0 0 0 60 345

7 GUJARAT 1934 2913 1360 0 0 0 489 0 6696

8 HARYANA 1490 6864 0 0 149 0 0 0 8SQ3

9 HIMACHAL PRADESH 175 119 371 0 0 0 0 0 665

10 JAMMU A KASHMIR 713 1237 163 0 0 0 0 0 2113

11 JHARKHAND 4033 7033 985 0 22 0 0 0 12073

12 KARNATAKA 4397 1902 1880 0 0 0 147 0 8286

13 KERALA 328 1036 1455 60 0 0 696 0 3775

14 MADHYA PRADESH 4534 4833 7334 0 0 0 0 0 16701

15 MAHARASHTRA 10030 5689 47 231 0 0 , 67 0 16064

16 MANIPUR 454 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 454

17 MEGHALAYA 0 478 0 0 0 0 0 0 478

18 MIZORAM 263 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 499

19 NAGALAND 106 93 100 0 0 0 0 0 299

20 ODISHA 1361 1867 5046 10 0 0 768 0 9052

21 PUNJAB 7139 1904 806 113 333 0 0 0 10295

22 RAJASTHAN 4548 4444 2796 111 0 0 0 0 11899

23 SIKKIM 61 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 120

24 TAMIL NADU 4816 611 1546 277 375 0 58 0 7682

25 TRIPURA 110 46 163 11 0 0 0 0 330

26 UTTAR PRADESH 1989 51379 608 86 0 0 0 o 54062

27 UTTARAKHAND 0 892 816 0 0 0 0 0 1708

28 WEST BENGAL 5159 3939 3551 178 0 q 740 0 13567

TOTAL (STATES) 69566 119575 36162 1242 879 0 3533 60 231017

29 A & N ISLANDS 0 690 14. 0 0 0 0 0 704

30 "CHANDIGARH 384 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 384

31 D & N HAVELI 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 25

32 DAMAN & DIU 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 17

33 DELHI 7246 1255 0 410 0 0 0 0 8911

8/11/2015 Annex


34 LAKSHADWEEP 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 30

35 PUDUCHERRY 99 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 112

TOTAL (UTs) 7729 1945 86 410 0 0 13 0 10183

TOTAL (ALLINDIA) 77295 121520 36243 1652 879 0 3546 60 241200



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



PENDING COURT CASES

183 . Chaudhary Shri Jayant

Tandon Shri Lal Ji


(a) the number of cases pending for disposal in High Courts across the country, Statewise andthe reasons therefor;

(b) the average number of cases disposed of by the High Courts in the country in a year;

(c) whether the Government had initiated any pendency reduction drive in the recent past;

(d) if so, the details thereof; and

(e) the other precise steps proposed to be.taken by the Government with a view to assisting thejudiciary in addressing the problem of pending cases?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF THE STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DR. ASHWANI KUMAR)

(a) to (e): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) to (e) OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTIONNO.183 FOR ANSWER ON 06th DECEMBER, 2012.

As per information made available by High Courts, a statement on number of cases pending fordisposal in various High Courts across the country as on 31.12.2011 is at Annex. The problem ofpendency has arisen mainly because the filings have been either equal or more than thedisposal. The other causes of increasing pendency are number of State and Central legislations,accumulation of first appeals, continuation of ordinary civil jurisdiction in some of the HighCourts, vacancies of Judges, appeals against orders of quasijudicial forums going to High Courts,number of revisions / appeals, adjournments, indiscriminate use of writ jurisdiction in HighCourts, lack of arrangement to monitor, track and bunch cases for hearing, changing pattern oflitigation etc. The average rate of disposal in High Courts during last three years (2009 to 2011)has been 16.85 lakh cases per year.

A pendency reduction drive was undertaken from July 2011 to December, 2011 in a campaignmode approach for clearing long pending cases and cases relating to marginalized sections of thesociety in High Courts and Subordinate Courts under their jurisdiction. As per informationreceived from the High Courts, net pendency in all courts was reduced by over 6 lakh cases. Outof them about 1.36 lakh cases were of the targeted groups such as senior citizens, disabled,minors and marginalized sections of society. A similar drive has been launched in this year aswell from July, 2012 to December, 2012. The focus of pendency reduction drive this year is tomake our judicial system `five plus` free. Simultaneously, emphasis is being laid on increasingthe number of judges in subordinate judiciary by filling the existing vacancies and creatingadditional posts so that disposal of cases is expedited by setting up of additional courts.

The Government has set up a National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms with thetwin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancingaccountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities.The Mission has been pursuing a coordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears andpendency in judicial administration which, inter alia, involves better infrastructure for courtsincluding computerisation, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislative



measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, reengineering of court procedure for quickdisposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. The National Mission has atime frame of five years (201116) to pursue them.

The Mission has taken several steps in the strategic areas towards fulfillment of its objectives. AnInterMinisterial Group (IMG) has been constituted to suggest necessary amendments to theNegotiable Instruments Act, 1881 along with other policy and administrative measures to checkincreasing litigation relating to cheque bounce cases. For the reengineering of court proceduresand court processes for early disposal of cases, a National Court Management System has beennotified by the Supreme Court for addressing the issues of case management, courtmanagement, setting measurable standards for performance of the courts and the NationalSystem of Judicial Statistics in the country.

Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary is a major thrust area for the NationalMission. With a view to enhancing the resources of the State Governments, the Government hasincreased the central share by revising the funding pattern from 50:50 to 75:25 (for Statesother than North Eastern States) under modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary from the year 201112 onwards. The funding patternfor NorthEastem States has been kept as 90:10 with effect from 201011.

Rs. 595 crore has been released as central assistance to States / UTs for infrastructuredevelopment of subordinate judiciary during 201112. Out of budget of Rs 660 crore in thecurrent financial year, Rs. 557 crore has been released to States / UTs till 30th November, 2012.On the recommendations of 13th Finance Commission, the Government has sanctioned Rs. 5000crore as grants to the States for 5 years between 201015 for undertaking various initiativessuch as increasing the number of court working hours using the existing infrastructure byholding morning / evening / shift courts; enhancing support to Lok Adalats to reduce thepressure on regular courts; providing additional funds to State Legal Services Authorities toenable them to provide legal aid to the marginalized and empower them to access justice;promoting the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism to resolve part of the disputesoutside the court system.

8/11/2015 Annex


Annex

LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO.183 FOR 6.12.2012

Statement on number of cases pending for disposal in High Courts as on 31.12.2011

SI. No Name of High Court Number of Cases pending for disposal in High Courts as on 31.12.2011.

1. Allahabad 10,05,5272 Andhra Pradesh 1,98,2143 Bombay 3,62,8854 Calcutta 3,47,1545 Delhi 61,2126. Gujarat 82,2327. Gauhati 53,2558. Himachal Pradesh 49,5419. Jammu & Kashmir 82,22310. Karnataka 1,72,08811. Kerala 1,28,77712. Madras 4,73,73613. Madhya Pradesh 2,29,33614. Orissa 3,01,31415. Patna 1,18,96416. Punjab & Haryana 2,43,66617. Rajasthan 2,81,30618. Sikkim 6719. Uttarakhand 19,26320. Chhattisgarh 50,16321. Jharkhand 61,277Total 43,22,200



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



REPORT OF SHETTY COMMISSION

2098. Shankar Alias Kushal Tiwari Shri Bhisma


(a) whether all the High Courts and District Courts have implemented the report of ShettyCommission regarding new pay and pay structure for judicial employees;

(b) if so, the details thereof Statewise;

(c) whether District Courts of Uttar Pradesh have not been included a new pay and pay structuretill date; and

(d) if so, the reasons therefor, and the time by which the said benefits are likely to be given tothem?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : In exercise of powers conferred under proviso to Article 309 read with Articles 233and 234 of the Constitution, the State Government frames rules and regulations in consultationwith the High Court in respect of the members of the State Judicial Service. Appointments,posting/transfers and other service conditions of judicial employees of the District/SubordinateCourts are governed by these Rules and Regulations. Accordingly, the respective StateGovernments are responsible for implementation of the Report of Shetty Commission regardingnew pay and pay structure for their judicial employees and information with regard to sijchimplementation is not available in the records of the Central Government.

Information with regard to the District Courts of Uttar Pradesh has been sought from theAllahabad High Court. The Allahabad High Court has intimated that the new pay and paystructure of Sixth Pay Commission have already been implemented vide G.O. No.VeAao21314/Dus59(M)/2008 of the Government of Uttar Pradesh. Information in respect of other HighCourts is being collected and will be laid on the Table of the House.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



NATIONAL JUDICIAL COMMISSION

2156. Dhurve Jyoti

Rajendran Shri C.


(a) whether the Government proposes to set up National Judicial Commission; and

(b) if so, the details and the present status thereof including the time frame within which theCommission is likely to be set up?

ANSWER


(a) & (b) The proposal for setting up of National Judicial Commission has been on the anvil since1990. But despite the recommendations of various Commissions including the 2ndAdministrative Reforms Commission, the proposal has not reached a final conclusion. TheConstitution (Amendment) Bills moved in 1990 as well as 2003 lapsed on both the occasions,due to dissolution of the House.

Currently, appointment of Judges to High Courts and Supreme Court is based on a Memorandumof Procedure for Appointment of Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts prepared in 1998.Representations have been made by various agencies and expert bodies to review / change thepresent procedure of appointment of judges. The proposal to have an alternative arrangementand to establish a National Judicial Commission through a constitutional amendment is underconsideration.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



JUDICIAL REFORMS AND GRAM NYAYALAYAS

2231. Adityanath Shri Yogi

Gandhi Shri Feroze Varun

Jaiswal Shri Gorakh Prasad

Swamygowda Shri N Cheluvaraya Swamy

Dubey Shri Nishikant

Pandurang Shri Munde Gopinathrao

Singh Shri Ratan


(a) whether the Government proposes any roadmap for judicial reforms in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the steps taken / proposed to be taken in this regard;

(c) the number of Gram Nyayalayas likely to be set up across the country during the currentyear and the funds provided for the purpose during the last three years and the current year,Statewise;

(d) whether all the Gram Nyayalayas are functioning with the requisite number of judges, if not,the manner in which the Government proposes to fillup vacancies of judges in these Nyayalayasacross the country;

(e) the present status of mobile courts in the country especially in backward areas; State wise;and

(f) the extent to which Gram Nyayalayas has improved / strengthened the judicial system in thecountry?

ANSWER


(a) to (f): The Government has set up a National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reformsin August, 2011 with the twin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears inthe system and enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performancestandards and capacities. The Mission has been pursuing a coordinated approach for phasedliquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial administration which, inter alia, involves betterinfrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary,policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, reengineering of courtprocedure for quick disposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. TheNational Mission has a time frame of five years (201116) to pursue them.

The Mission has taken several steps in the strategic areas towards fulfillment of its objectives. AConstitution Amendment Bill for raising the retirement age of High Court Judges is before theParliament. An InterMinisterial Group (IMG) has been constituted to suggest necessaryamendments to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 along with other policy and administrativemeasures to check increasing litigation relating to cheque bounce cases. An important aspect ofthe judicial reforms relates to reengineering court procedures and court processes for earlydisposal of cases. A National Court Management System has been notified by the Hon`bleSupreme Court for addressing the issues of case management, court management, settingmeasurable standards for performance of the courts and the National System of JudicialStatistics in the country.



Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary is a major thrust area for the NationalMission. With a view to enhancing the resources of the State Governments, the Government hasincreased the central share by revising the funding pattern from 50:50 to 75:25 (for Statesother than North Eastern States) under modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary from the year 201112 onwards. The funding patternfor NorthEastern States has been kept as 90:10 with effect from 201011. An amount of Rs.595 crore was released as central assistance to States / UTs for infrastructure development ofsubordinate judiciary during 201112. A budget provision of Rs 660 crore was made for thisscheme during the current financial year and an amount of Rs. 557 crore has been released toStates / UTs till 30th November, 2012.

On the recommendations of 13th Finance Commission, the Government has sanctioned Rs. 5000crore as grants for the States for aperiod of 5 years between 20102015, for various initiativessuch as increasing the number of court working hours using the existing infrastructure byholding morning / evening / shift courts; enhancing support to Lok Adalats to reduce thepressure on regular courts; providing additional funds to State Legal Services Authorities toenable them to provide legal aid to the marginalized and empower them to access justice;promoting the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism to resolve part of the disputesoutside the court system.

Encouraged by the reduction over 6 lakhs in pending cases undertaken from July 2011 toDecember 2011, the Government has undertaken a similar drive this year as well from July,2012 to December, 2012 with the support of State High Courts. The main focus of pendencyreduction drive this year is to make our judicial system `five plus` free. `Simultaneously;emphasis is being laid on increasing the number of judges in subordinate judiciary by filling theexisting vacancies and creating additional posts so that disposal of cases is expedited and there isreduction in overall pendency.

The Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 was enacted by Parliament for establishment of GramNyayalayas at the intermediate Panchayat level with a view to providing access to justice tocitizens at their doorsteps. The Act has come into force with effect from 2nd October, 2009. Interms of Section 3 (1) of the Act, it is for the State Governments to establish Gram Nyayalayas inconsultation with the respective High Courts.

The Central Government has been encouraging the States in this regard by providing financialassistance with the prescribed norms both for nonrecurring expenses for setting up of GramNyayafayas and for meeting the cost of recurring expenses for running these Gram Nyayalayasfor the first three years, Based on the reports received from the States, the status ofoperationalization of Gram Nyayalayas as on 30.11.2012 is indicated below:

Sr. No. State Gram Nyayalayas Gram Nyayalayas notified operationalized

1. Madhya Pradesh 89 892. Rajasthan 45 453. Orissa 14 84. Karnataka 2 ‐5. Maharashtra 10 96. Jharkhand 6 ‐7 Goa 2 ‐ Total 168 151

Financial Assistance released to the State Governments for setting up of Gram Nyayalayas duringlast three years and the current financial year is as follows:

(Rs. In lakhs)State 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 TotalMadhya Pradesh 632.00 745.40 156.80 0.00 1534.20Rajasthan 567.00 0.00 144.00 0.00 711.00Orissa 15.80 0.00 110.60 0.00 126.40Maharashtra 132.60 0.00 9.60 0.00 142.20Karnataka 0.00 0.00 25.20 0.00 25.20Jharkhand 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.60 75.60Goa 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.20 25.20Total 1347.40 745.40 446.20 100.80 2639.80



In terms of Section 6(1) of the Act, the State Government is required to appoint a Nyayadhikarifor every Gram Nyayalaya in consultation with High Courts. As per the evaluation report of theIndian Law Institute on effectiveness of functioning of Gram Nyayalayas in Madhya Pradesh andRajasthan, they are being presided over at present by regular judicial officers who are alreadyoverburdened.

The Gram Nyayalayas Act authorises the Gram Nyayalaya to hold mobile court outside itsheadquarters in terms of Section 9 of the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008. Further, with a view tohave a speedier disposal of petty cases and to make judicial system accessible to remote andbackward regions, several States have been taking recourse to using mobile courts for handlingsuch cases from time to time.

The operationalization of Gram Nyayalaya Scheme is in the initial stages of implementation. Assuch, its impact on strengthening of judicial system in the country would be known after a periodof time. In the meanwhile, the Government has planned several measures for making the GramNyayalayas more effective for playing an important role in judicial system.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



BENCHES OF HIGH COURT

2250. Kaswan Shri Ram Singh

Sugavanam Shri E.G.


(a) the details of High Courts/High Court Benches functioning in the country at present, Statewise;

(b) whether the Union Government has received proposals to set up High Courts/High CourtBenches in the country where the same has not been established so far; and

(c) if so, the details thereof and the time by which they are likely to be set up, Statewise?

ANSWER


(a): A Statement showing the details of High Courts and their Benches functioning in the countryat present, is at Annex.

(b) & (c): The NorthEastern Areas (Reorganisation) and Other Related Laws (Amendment) Act,2012 passed by the Parliament, provides for setting up of separate High Courts in the States ofMeghalaya, Manipur and Tripura. The Government has already initiated action for establishingthese High Courts in the three States.

As regards the setting up of High Court Benches, proposal for setting up of Circuit Bench of theCalcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri, and proposal for making the two existing Circuit Benches of theKarnataka High Court at Dharwad and Gulbarga into Permanent Benches, are underconsideration of the Government

8/11/2015 ANNRX


ANNRX

Annexed referred in reply to Lok Sabha Unstarred Oueston No. 2250 for answered on 06.12.2012

NAME OF HIGH COURTS, THEIR PRINCIPAL SEATS,BENCHES AND THEIR JURISDICTION

SI. No. High Court PrincipalSeat

Jurisdiction Permanent/Circuit Bench andDate from which the Benchbegan functioning

I Allahabad Allahabad Uttar Pradesh Lucknow (01.07.1948)2 Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 3 Bombay Mumbai Maharashtra; Goa; Daman

& Diu; Dadra & NagarHavel i;

Nagpur (01.05.1960)Panaji (01.07.1948)Aurangabad (27.08.1984)

4 Calcutta Kolkata West Bengal & Andaman& Nicobar Islands

5 Chattisgarh Bi las pur Chattisgarh 6 Delhi New Delhi NCT of Delhi 7 Gauhati Guwahati Assam, Meghalaya,

Nagaland, Manipur,Tripura, Mizoram, &Arunachal Pradesh.

Kohima, (10.02.1990)Aizawl, (05.07.1990)Imphal, (21.01.1992)Agartala, (10.05.1992)Shiilong (04.02.1998)Itanagar (12.08.2000)

8 Gujarat Sola (Ahmedabad) Gujarat 9 Himachal Pradesh Shimla Himachal Pradesh 10 Jammu & Kashmir Jammu&

SrinagarJammu & Kashmir

11 Jharkhand Ranchi Jharkhand 12 Kamataka Bangalore Kamataka Circuit Benches Dharwar

(07.02.2008) Gulbarga(07.02.2008)

13 Kerala* Kochi Kerala & LakshadweepIslands

14 Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh Gwalior (01.11.1956)Indore (01.11.1956)

15 Madras Chennai Tamil Nadu &Pondicherry

Madurai (24.07.2004)

16 Orissa Cuttack Orissa 17 Patna Patna Bihar 18 Punjab & Haryana Chandigarh Punjab, Haryana &

Chandigarh

19 Rajasthan Jodhpur Rajasthan Jaipur (31.01.1977)20 Sikkim Gangtok Sikkim 21 Uttarakhand Nainital Uttarakhand



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



ASSETS OF JUDGES

2269. Thakur Shri Anurag Singh


(a) whether the judges of all High Courts and Supreme Court have declared their assets;

(b) if so, the details thereof, Statewise;

(c) whether this declaration is mandatory by law; and


ANSWER


(a) to (d): At present, declaration of assets by Judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court isnot mandatory by law. As a result, the procedure adopted for declaration of assets by Judges inthe Supreme Court and High Courts is different in different High Courts. The status with respectof declaration of assets by Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courtwise status ofdeclaration of assets, is given at the Annex.

`The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2012`, which has been passed by the Lok Sabhahas provisions for the Judges to declare their assets and liabilities. Thus, declaration of assets bythem will become mandatory after the Bill has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and it becomesan Act.

8/11/2015 LOK SABHA ANNEXURE UNSTARRED QUE


LOK SABHA ANNEXURE UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 2269 DATED 06.12.2012

ANNEXURE

SI.No.

Name of HighCourt

Date ofReply

Reply

1. Supreme Court 19.11.2009 Hon'ble Chief Justice of tndia and twentyone Hon'bleJudges of the Supreme Court of India have declared theirassets which are available on Supreme Courts websitewww.suDremecourtofindia.nic.in

2. Allahabad 09.12.2009 According to Excerpt from the Minutes of the Hon'ble FullCourt Meeting held on 12.09.2009, after due deliberationshas decided, Hon'ble Judges to disclose the statement ofassets to Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

3 Andhra Pradesh 02.07.2010 All the Hon'ble Judges of High Court of Andhra Pradeshhave declared their Assets in a sealed cover andsubmitted them to the Hon'ble Chief Justice. The saidcover is under the safe custody of the Hon'ble ChiefJustice.

4 Bombay 16.02.2010 All the sitting Hon'ble Judges of Bombay High Court havedeclared their assets to the Hon'ble Chief Justice.

5 Calcutta 18.02.2010 Information has been sent by the Hon'ble Chief Justice tothe Hon'ble Chief Justice of India.

6 Delhi 19.11.2009 All the Hon'ble Judges of the High Court have furnisheddetails of their assets to Hon'ble the Chief Justice of theHigh Court and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Valmiki J. Mehta,Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indermeet Kaur, Hon'ble Mr. JusticeA.K. Pathak and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta whichhave assumed the office on 15.04.2009, 14.05.2009,14.05.2009 and 23.10.2009, respectively are in theprocess of furnishing the details of their assets.

7 Gauhati 20.08.2010 The number of Judges who have declared their assets inthe Gauhati High Court (Including the Chief Justice) is 20.

8 Gujarat 11.08.2010 All the Hon'ble Judges of the High Court have declaredtheir assets at the time of their appointment.

9 HimachalPradesh

13.08.2010 All the Judges of the High Court of Himachal Pradeshhave declared their assets and liabilities and the samehave even been placed on the website of the H.P. HighCourt in the month of May, 2010.

10 Jammu &Kashmir

31.01.2010 All the Judges of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir,have declared their assets in 2008 as well as in the monthof January, 2010, in terms of the Resolution adopted bythe Supreme Court in its meeting held on May 07, 1997,which are in custody in the office of Chief Justice.

11 Jharkhand 27.08.2010 A meeting of Judges of the High Court was held todiscuss the matter in which there was a consensusamongst the Judges to disclose their assets. Accordingly,13 Judges have disclosed their assets to the Chief Justicetill date.

8/11/2015 LOK SABHA ANNEXURE UNSTARRED QUE


12 Karnataka 12.05.2010 33 Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Karnataka havedisclosed their assets and liabilities.

13 Kerala 13.08.2010 The number of Judges of High Court who have declaredtheir assets is 33 (all the Judges including the ChiefJustice).

14 Madhya Pradesh 1208.2010 In pursuance of the Resolution of the Full Court Meetic^gheld on 23.08.2008, all the Hon'ble Judges of the MadhyaPradesh High Court including Hon'ble Chief Justice havedeclared their assets which are kept in a sealed cover withthe Hon'ble Chief Justice.

15 Madras 21.12.2010 All the Honourable Judges of the Madras High Court,except the newly appointed three Honourable Judges,have declared their assets and they are available in theMadras High Court website (www.hcmadras.tn.nic.in)

16 Orissa 16.02.2010 All the Judges have voluntary declared their assets andaccordingly the matter was intimated by Hon'ble ActingChief Justice to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India videletter dated 25.01.2010.

17 Patna 06.01.2011 Twenty five (25) Hon'ble Judges have declared theirassets till date.

18 Punjab &Haryana

07.06.2010 All the Hon'ble Judges have declared their assets and thesaid information is available on the website of the Courti.e. http:/highcourtchd.gov.in.

19 Rajasthan 19.11.2010 Hon'ble Full Court vide circulation case no. 12/2009 hasagreed in principle that all the Hon'ble Judges of the HighCourt shall disclose their, spouse and dependents' assets.Modalities would be decided in due course.

20 Sikkim 12.02.2010 All three Judges have declared their assets. The samehave been uploaded online and can be viewed at the HighCourt of Sikkim Website www.hiahcourtofsikkim.nic.in.

21 Uttarakhand 09.11.2010 All the Hon'ble Judges including Hon'ble the Chief Justicehave declared their assets. The number of such Hon'bleJudges is 08 (eight) at present.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



WORKING DAYS IN COURTS

2278. Vasava Shri Mansukhbhai D.

Antony Shri Anto

Ramkishun Shri

Ganpatrao Shri Jadhav Prataprao

Mahto Shri Baidyanath Prasad

M.Thambidurai Dr.


(a) whether there is any proposal to increase the number of working days in all the courts in thecountry;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor; and

(c) the steps taken/proposed to be taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) : There is no such proposal. The working days in each of the High Courts are regulated by theRules framed by the respective Court. The working days of the District/Subordinate Courts areregulated by the concerned High Court.

(b)& (c ) : Do not arise.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



DISPOSAL OF COURT CASES

284 . Nagar Shri Surendra Singh


(a) whether any study / assessment has been made about the average time taken for disposal ofcases by the courts in the country, categorywise;


(c) whether the courts in the country are taking a longer period of time in disposing the caseswhen compared to the courts in the developed countries;

(d) if so, the facts in this regard; and

(e) the steps being taken / proposed to be taken to expedite disposal of cases by the courts in thecountry?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

STATEMENT REFERRED IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) to (e) OF LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO.284 FOR ANSWER ON 13th DECEMBER, 2012.

No formal study / assessment has been made. The actual time taken for disposal of a casedepends on several factors such as category of the case (civil or criminal), complexity of thefacts involved, nature of evidence, cooperation of stakeholders viz. bar, investigation agencies,witnesses and litigants besides the availability of physical infrastructure, supporting court staffand applicable rules of procedure. A number of expert committees including Law Commission ofIndia have gone into reasons for delayed disposal and, consequent, pendency of cases. Based onthe recommendations made, Government has carried out amendments to Code of Civil Procedure(C. P. C.) and Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. P. C.) for expediting the disposal of cases and,consequent, reduction in pendency in courts.

The Government is not aware of any such empirical comparison having been made nor can sucha comparison be valid between India and developed countries for reasons of difference inavailability of infrastructure facilities, use of technology, number of judicial officers per million ofpopulation (judgepopulation ratio), docketratio (populationcase filing ratio), provisions ofsubstantive laws and procedures in courts and court/case management etc. These differ widelyfrom country to country.

Taking into account the urgent need of Judicial Reforms to improve the access to justice to thepeople, a National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms has been set up with twinobjectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancingaccountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities.The Mission has been pursuing a coordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears andpendency in judicial administration which, inter alia, involves better infrastructure for courtsincluding computerisation, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislativemeasures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, reengineering of court procedure for quickdisposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. The National Mission has atime frame of five years (201116) to pursue them.



The Mission has taken several steps in the strategic areas towards fulfilment of its objectives. AnInterMinisterial Group (IMG) has been constituted to suggest necessary amendments to theNegotiable Instruments Act, 1881 along with other policy and administrative measures to checkincreasing litigations relating to cheque bounce cases. For the reengineering of courtprocedures and court processes for early disposal of cases, a National Court Management System(NCMS) has been notified by the Supreme Court for addressing the issues of case management,court management, setting measurable standards for performance of the courts and the NationalSystem of Judicial Statistics in the country.

Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary is a major thrust area for the NationalMission. With a view to enhancing the resources of the State Governments, the Government hasincreased the central share by revising the funding pattern from 50:50 to 75:25 (for Statesother than North Eastern States) under modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary from the year 201112 onwards. The funding patternfor NorthEastern States has been kept as 90:10 with effect from 201011.

Rs. 595 crore has been released as central assistance to States / UTs for infrastructuredevelopment of subordinate judiciary during 201112. Out of budget of Rs 660 crore in thecurrent financial year, Rs. 557 crore has been released to States / UTs till 30th November, 2012.

On the recommendations of 13th Finance Commission, the Government has sanctioned Rs. 5000crore as grants to the States for 5 years between 201015 for undertaking various initiativessuch as increasing the number of court working hours using the existing infrastructure byholding morning / evening / shift courts; enhancing support to Lok Adalats to reduce thepressure on regular courts; providing additional funds to State Legal Services Authorities toenable them to provide legal aid to the marginalized and empower them to access justice;promoting the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism to resolve part of the disputesoutside the court system.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



SHORTAGE OF JUDGES

3242. Sugumar Shri K.


(a) whether the Government is considering to make a change with regard to the ratio betweenthe judges and the population to a respectable level as compared with other developingcountries;


(c) whether the shortage of judges is seriously affecting the disposal of cases in the courts in thecountry; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and the steps proposed to be taken thereon?

ANSWER


(a) and (b) : The Judge strength of the High Courts is reviewed once every three years based onthe data received from the High Courts for the triennial review of the judge strength of the HighCourts on the number of cases filed and disposed.

With regard to subordinate judiciary, the Supreme Court in its judgement of 21st March, 2002, inAll India Judges Association and Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors had directed the States that anincrease in the judge strength from the existing 10.5 to 13 per 10 lakh people to 50 Judges per10 lakh people, should be effected and implemented within a period of five years. On this, amodification petition in the Supreme Court was filed praying that the increase in Judge Strengthin the Union Territories for which Central Government is administratively responsible be allowedbased on workload and pendency of cases. This is pending for hearing.

In the meantime the Advisory Council of the National Mission for Justice Delivery and LegalReforms has discussed it and recommended that the judgepopulation ratio cannot be solecriterion for determining the additional number of judges required. The other criteria such asdocketratio and populationfiling ratio are more potent for determining the requirement ofjudges. The Law Commission is working on collecting information on various parameters with aview to arrive at scientific and rational criteria for determination of requirement of additionalJudges / Courts in the country.

(c) and (d): The disposal of cases is no doubt, dependent on availability of Judges. But it is alsocontingent on other factors such the case management, court management, infrastructure andmodernization of courts, etc. The vacancies of Judges in courts is another factor for continuingpendency in the courts. Filling up of the vacancies is a continuous process as they keep onarising on account of retirement, resignation or elevation of Judges. Under Article 235 of theConstitution of India, administrative control over the subordinate judiciary vests with theconcerned High Courts.

Disposal of pending cases in various courts is within the domain of the judiciary. However, with aview to assist judiciary in addressing the problem of pendency of cases, the Central Governmenthas set up a National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms in August 2011. With thetwin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancingaccountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities.



The Mission will be pursuing a coordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears andpendency in judicial administration which, inter alia, involve better infrastructure for courtsincluding computerization, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislativemeasures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, reengineering of court procedure for quickdisposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. The National Mission has atime frame of five years (201116) to pursue these initiatives.

During the short span of its existence, the Mission has taken several steps in the strategic areastowards fulfillment of its objectives. A Constitution Amendment Bill for raising the retirement ageof High Court Judges is before the Parliament. A comprehensive proposal has been formulatedfor constitution of All India Judicial Service. An InterMinisterial Group (IMG) has beenconstituted to suggest necessary amendments to the Negotiable Instruments Act along withother policy and administrative measures to check increasing litigation relating to cheque bouncecases.

An important aspect of the judicial reforms relates to reengineering court procedures and courtprocesses for early disposal of cases. A National Court Management System has been notified bythe Hon’ble Supreme Court for addressing the issues of case management, court management,setting measurable standards for performance of the courts and the National System of JudicialStatistics in the country. A Sub Group on improving the court procedure and court processes forbetter criminal justice system has been constituted under the Chairman, Law Commission tosuggest necessary changes in this regard.

Infrastructure development for the subordinate judiciary is a major thrust area for the NationalMission. With a view to enhancing the resources of the State Governments, the Government hasincreased the Central Share by revising the funding pattern from 50:50 to 75:25 (for Statesother than North Eastern States) under modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme for developmentof infrastructure facilities for the judiciary with effect from 201112 onwards. The fundingpattern for NorthEastern States has however, been kept at 90:10 w.e.f 201011. Rs.595 crorehas been released as central assistance to States / UTs for infrastructure development ofsubordinate judiciary in 201112. A budget provision of Rs. 660 crore has been made in thecurrent financial year. Of this Rs.492 crore has already been released to States / UTs upto 31stOctober, 2012.

On the basis of pendency reduction drive from July, 2011 to December, 2011 in which totalpendency was reduced by over 6 lakh cases, a similar drive has been undertaken this year alsofrom July to December, 2012. The main focus of pendency reduction drive this year is to makeour judicial system free of cases more than five (5) years old. Simultaneously, emphasis is beinglaid on increasing the number of judges in subordinate judiciary by filling the existing vacanciesand creating additional posts so that disposal of cases is expedited and there is reduction inoverall pendency.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR MARGINALIZED PEOPLE

3324. Singh Shri Sushil Kumar


(a)whether the Government has launched a project Access to Justice for Marginalised people inthe country;


(c) the present status of this project, Statewise; and

(d)the steps taken by the Government to implement it successfully across the country?

ANSWER


(a) to (d): The Department of Justice. Government of India has, in collaboration with the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP),implementeda project on Access to Justice forMarginalized People in seven States of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha,Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh between 2009 and 2012. Several activities related to legal aid andempowerment have been conducted in eighty seven (87) districtsin collaboration with thirtythree (33)NGOs, law schools, and other partners. Apart from conducting public education andtraining of communities as well as service delivery organisations, many innovative strategieswere used for enhancing legal awareness of the marginalized groups including supporting lawschool based legal clinics, using SMS, MMS, games, skits and community radio. Many knowledgeproducts have also been developed including action research studies and training manuals forthe community, judicial officers and other stakeholders.

The Project has reached out to nearly 2 million people for legal aware ness, besides training7000 paralegal workers as local resources to assist the marginalized communities. Over 300legal aid lawyers have also been trained and sensitized.The Project activities concluded with aninternational conference on `Equitable Access to Justice: Legal Aid and Legal Empowerment`which provided a platform for participants from twenty one (21) countries across the world toshare good practices on legal aid and empowerment which will be helpful in devising similarfuture programmes of Government of india.The Project will conclude on 31s` December 2012.

The models of legal aid and empowerment developed under the Projects will be useful for theNational and State Legal Services Authorities for replicating and upscaling across the country.The Government has, however, decided to undertake a similar programme in the 8 States ofNorth East India (including Sikkim) and Jammu and Kashmir during the 12th Five Year Plan.The Government will also be undertaking another project with UNDP from January 2013.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES



(a) whether the Government feels that there is need to make the process of appointment ofjudges in High Courts and Supreme Court transparent;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) the time by which the steps are proposed to be taken in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) to (c) :Appointment of Judges to High Courts and Supreme Court is based on a Memorandumof Procedure for Appointment of Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts prepared in 1998.Representations have been made by various agencies and expert bodies to review/change thepresent procedure of appointment of judges. It is generally felt that the System/Procedure ofappointment needs to be reviewed in the light of past experience. The proposal to have analternative arrangement through a constitutional amendment, is under consideration.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



JUDICIAL STANDARDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY BILL

3420. Owaisi Shri Asaduddin


(a) whether the Government proposes to amend section 3(2) (g) of the Judicial Standards andAccountability Bill on comments of the judges against constitutional authority during hearing ofthe cases;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the time by which the amended version of the Bill is likely to beintroduced in Parliament; and

(c) if so, the steps proposed to be taken by the Government to ameliorate the relations betweenJudiciary and Executive?

ANSWER


(a) and (b): Yes Madam; there is a proposal to make an amendment to this section. It isproposed to move the Bill in the current session of Parliament.

(c): The Judiciary and Executive are independent organs of the Government. But they havealways worked in their area of work respecting the independence of each other.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CENTRAL TRIBUNALS

395 . Thamaraiselvan Shri R.

Adsul Shri Anandrao Vithoba


(a) whether the Ministry has decided or proposes to bring all Central Tribunals under a unifiedcontrol;

(b) if so, the details thereof including the modalities worked out therefor;

(c) whether any of the Ministries have opposed the said decision; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and the action taken by his Ministry thereon?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : A Statement is laid on the Table of the House.

Statement referred to in reply to Lok Sabha Starred Question No.395 due for answer on 20thDecember, 2012.

(a) to (d) : As per information available, there are 62 Tribunals/Authorities established by 24Ministries/Departments of the Government of India . In pursuance of the judgments of theSupreme Court of India in L. Chandra Kumar’s case (AIR 1997 SC 11251155) and Civil AppealNo.3067 of 2004 – Union of India Vs R. Gandhi, a proposal to bring all Tribunals under theadministrative control of a single nodal agency in order to have uniformity of appointments andservice conditions and to deal with complaints of irregularities or misconduct by the officebearers of the Tribunals has been under consideration. Comments of the 24 concernedMinistries/Departments were sought. Comments have been received from 22Ministries/Departments. Only four (4) Ministries/Departments have supported the proposal andten (10) have not favoured it. Eight (8) Departments have conveyed conditional concurrence. Asconsensus has remained elusive, an InterMinisterial Group (IMG) has been set up to discussthe feasibility of having a central level agency for exercising administrative control over thequasi judicial bodies. Three meetings of the IMG have been held on 13.09.2012, 05.10.2012 and30.11.2012.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



PROCESS FOR APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES

4383. Aaron Rashid Shri J.M.


(a) whether the existing process for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courthas been termed as unsatisfactory by sections of the Bar and the judiciary;


(c) whether the existing system for removal of judges of the higher judiciary is alsocumbersome and insufficient and there is a need for evolving an alternative method for judges’removal in addition to the same; and

(d) if so, the details thereof and the action taken thereon?

ANSWER


(a) and (b): The present method of Appointment of Judges to High Courts and Supreme Court isbased on a Memorandum of Procedure for Appointment of Judges of Supreme Court and HighCourts prepared in 1998 pursuant to the judgement of the Supreme Court of October 6, 1993read with their Advisory Opinion of October 28, 1998. Concerns have been raised by members ofcivil society, eminent jurists, etc. about the existing procedure for appointment of judges toSupreme Court and High Courts. The proposal to have an alternative arrangement and toestablish a Judicial Appointments Commission through a constitutional amendment is underconsideration but no time frame can be set for this, as amendment to constitution is a timeconsuming process.

(c) and (d): Presently removal of Judges by impeachment is governed by Article 124(4) readwith proviso (b) to Article 124(2) and proviso (b) to Article 217 (1) of the Constitution. There isno proposal for the moment for amending the existing system.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



REGIONAL LANGUAGES

4427. Jardosh Smt. Darshana Vikram


(a) whether the Government has taken any steps in consultation with the Ministry of HomeAffairs and Supreme Court to allow regional languages of concerned States for judicialproceedings of the concerned High Court of the States;


(c) whether any request was received from the Court of Gujarat in this regard; and

(d) if so, the time by which it is likely to be allowed?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : The Government has received proposals from the Governments of Tamil Nadu,Gujarat and Chhattisgarh regarding use of Tamil, Gujarati and Hindi in the proceedings of theMadras High Court, Gujarat High Court and Chhattisgarh High Court respectively.

As per the decision of the competent authority in its meeting held on 21.5.1965, comments ofthe Chief Justice of India are necessary before the Department of Official Language in Ministry ofHome Affairs could consider such proposals. The Chief Justice of India has intimated that theproposals regarding use of Hindi, Tamil and Gujarati in the High Courts of Chhattisgarh, Madrasand Gujarat respectively have been considered by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of India inthe meeting held on 11.10.2012. The Full Court, after due deliberations, has decided not toaccept the proposals and have reiterated the earlier similar Resolutions of the Full Court of theSupreme Court adopted on 07.05.1997 and 15.10.1999. The decision of Supreme Court hasbeen conveyed to the Department of Official Language in Ministry of Home Affairs.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



JUDICIAL STANDARDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY BILL

4451. Das Shri Khagen


(a) whether the Government is aware of the incidents of taking bribe by CBI Judges particularlyin Andhra Pradesh during the last two years;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the action taken thereon; and

(c) the extent to which the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill will help in curbing suchincidents?

ANSWER


(a) and (b): Allegations of corruption in the judiciary have come to the notice of the Governmentand have been reported in the media also from time to time. Recently, the Andhra Pradesh HighCourt has, based on the letter of authorities of CBI showing the complicity of Shri T. PattabhiRama Rao, Additional Special Judges for trial of CBI cases, Hyderabad, placed him undersuspension in the matter of granting bail to Sri Gali Janardhan Reddy, accused in a. criminalcase.

(c) : As regards the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, it envisages to provide amechanism for enquiring into complaints against Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.Besides, by laying down judicial standards and by requiring the Judges of these courts to declaretheir assets and liabilities, it will help improve their accountability.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



CORRUPTION IN JUDICIARY


Singh Shri Pashupati Nath


(a) whether corruption in judiciary is on rise at present in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the action taken thereon, Statewise; and

(c) the steps proposed to be taken by the Government for complete elimination of corruption injudiciary?

ANSWER


(a) to (c): Allegations of corruption in the judiciary have come to the notice of the Governmentand have been reported in the media also from time to time. As per the “inhouse mechanism”for the higher judiciary, Chief Justice of India is competent to received complaints against theconduct of the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the High Courts. Similarly,the Chief Justices of the High Courts are competent to receive complaints against the conduct oftheir Courts. Administrative control over the members of the subordinate judiciary in the Statesvests with the concerned High Court and State Government. In view of this, the CentralGovernment do not maintain records of such complaints and has no mechanism to monitor theaction taken on the same.

There is a proposal to change the existing system for investigation into the complaints ofmisbehaviour or incapacity of a Judges of the Supreme Court or High Courts as well as to enforcegreater accountability. A Comprehensive Bill titled “The Judicial Standards and AccountabilityBill, 2012’ has been passed by the Lok Sabha with this objective. The Bill, besides providing for acomprehensive system for looking into the complaints as well as the penalties which can beimposed on the completion of the enquiry, lays down the judicial standards and also make itincumbent on the Judges to declare their assets/liabilities.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



PENDING CASES IN GUWAHATI HIGH COURT

4498. Ajmal Shri Badruddin


(a) whether a large number of cases relating to foreigners are pending in Guwahati High Court;and

(b) if so, the details thereof including the number of cases filed, disposed off and pending since2005 till date, yearwise?

ANSWER


(a) & (b): As per the information made available by Gauhati High Court, 618 cases relating toforeigners are cumulatively pending since 2005 in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Courtpertaining to the State of Assam as on 17.12.2012. Yearwise details of number of casesinstituted, disposed and pending in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court relating toforeigners are as below:

Sr. Year Number of CasesNo. Instituted Disposed Pending

1. 2005 29 22 7

2. 2006 9 6 3

3. 2007 37 20 17

4. 2008 119 49 70

5. 2009 223 66 157

6. 2010 181 48 133



7. 2011 140 42 98

8. 2012 150 17 133

(till 17.12.2012)

Total 888 270 618



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



MODEL COURTS

4506. Antony Shri Anto


(a) whether the Government is planning to set up Model Courts in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor;

(c) the salient features of the proposed Model Court;

(d) the steps taken by the Government for setting up Model Court and the timeframe to thateffect; and

(e) the estimated outlay for the setting up of the Model Courts?

ANSWER


(a) to (e) : Yes, Madam. The Working Group for Department of Justice, to makerecommendations for formulating plan/schemes/programmes for the 12th Five Year Plan period(2012 – 2017) has recommended, interalia, setting up of Model Courts to cover the gaps in theexisting schemes and policies relating to justice delivery and to demonstrate change in thescenario where end to end needs of judicial reforms are met.

The objective of Model Courts is to identify and address root causes of delay in the disposal ofcases by the subordinate judiciary. Towards this end, improvement in the case flow systems andrecord management and reforms in the Court administration by providing skill development intime management and court management is proposed.

The Scheme of Model Courts is proposed to be implemented during the 12th Five Year Planperiod (20122017) at an estimated budget of Rs. 130 crores. The Advisory Council of theNational Mission on Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms has set up a SubGroup on Model Courtsunder the chairmanship of Shri Justice (retd.) P.V.Reddi, former chairperson of Law Commissionof India. The subgroup has developed a conceptualized framework for Model Courts which hasbeen shared with select High Courts for developing Model Courts Pilots looking to the localrequirements. The implementation of Pilots will commence after the detailed project reports aremade ready.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



ACCESSIBLE JUSTICE

4575. Siddeswara Shri Gowdar Mallikarjunappa


(a) whether the Union Government has taken any steps to make justice accessible to the poorespecially the SCs/STs/OBCs and other minority sections of the society;

(b) if so, the details thereof during the last three years; and

(c) if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER


(a) to (c) : The Government has taken many steps to make justice accessible to the poor andmarginalised sections of the society. Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 a member ofa Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, a victim of trafficking or a beggar, a woman or a child, amentally ill or otherwise disabled person and poor people, are amongst those who are entitled toreceive free legal service. Out of the Thirteenth Finance Commission Award for the Judiciary ofRs.5,000 crore, Rs.1050 crore have been earmarked for legal aid services and for AlternateDispute Redressal (ADR) mechanism so that the poor can access speedy justice at an affordablecost.

Recognising the fact that a key barrier to accessing justice is the lack of awareness of rights andentitlements, the Government in Department of Justice has, in collaboration with the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP), implemented a project on Access to Justice forMarginalized People women, children, SCs, STs, minorities, people living with disability inseven States of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan and UttarPradesh between 2009 and 2012. Several activities related to legal aid and empowerment havebeen conducted in eighty seven (87) districts in collaboration with thirty three (33) NGOs, lawschools, and other partners. Apart from conducting education and training of communities aswell as service delivery organisations, many innovative strategies were used for enhancing legalawareness of the marginalized groups including supporting law school based legal clinics, usingSMS, MMS, games, skits and community radio.

The Project has reached out to nearly 20 lakh marginalized people for legal awareness, besidestraining 7000 paralegal workers as local resources to assist the marginalized communities. Over300 legal aid lawyers have also been trained and sensitized. The models of legal aid andempowerment developed under the Projects will be useful for the National and State LegalServices Authorities for replicating and upscaling across the country.

The Government has decided to undertake a similar programme in the 8 States of North EastIndia (including Sikkim) and Jammu and Kashmir during the 12th Five Year Plan.



GOVERNMENT OF INDIA


LOK SABHA



BENCH OF ODISHA

4600. Das Shri Bhakta Charan


(a) whether the Government has contributed any plan to establish a Bench of Odisha High Courtat Sambalpur to minimise the problems faced by the people of Western Odisha;


(c) if not, the reason therefor; and

(d) the time by which the decision is likely to be taken in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) to (d) : Setting up of a Bench of a High Court is considered by the Government in terms ofSection 51(2) of the States’ Reorganisation Act, 1956, after receipt of a complete proposal fromthe State Government, which has to have the consent of the Chief Justice of the concerned HighCourt. No such proposal has been received by the Central Government from the StateGovernment of Odisha.

8/11/2015 untitled page [doj.gov.in] · 8/11/2015 untitled page...

Documents