Download - REPORT NO. 96
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTAR
ON PERSONNEL PUBLIC
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi
March
NINENTY
Demands for Grants (2018
the Ministry
(Presented to the Rajya Sabha on
(Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
RAJYA SABHA
RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE
ON PERSONNEL PUBLIC GRIEVANCES LAW AND JUSTICE
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi
March, 2018 / Phalguna 1939 (Saka)
NINENTY-SIXTH REPORT
on
Demands for Grants (2018-2019) of
the Ministry of Law and Justice
Presented to the Rajya Sabha on 14th
March, 2018)
Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 14th
March, 2018)
Y STANDING COMMITTEE
LAW AND JUSTICE
REPORT NO.
96
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTAR
ON PERSONNEL,
Rajya
March, 2018
NINENTY
Demands for Grants (2018
the Ministry of Law and Justice
(Presented to the Rajya Sabha on
(Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on
CS (P & L)
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
RAJYA SABHA
RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE
ON PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES, LAW AND JUSTICE
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi
March, 2018 / Phalguna 1939 (Saka)
NINENTY-SIXTH REPORT
on
Demands for Grants (2018-2019) of
the Ministry of Law and Justice
Presented to the Rajya Sabha on 14th
March, 2018)
Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 14th
March, 2018)
CS (P & L) - 191
Y STANDING COMMITTEE
LAW AND JUSTICE
2018)
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
ACRONYMS
ATFE Appellate Tribunal of Foreign Exchange
BCI Bar Council of India
CEO Chief Electoral Officer
CJI Chief Justice of India
CSS Centrally Sponsored Scheme
DEO District Election Officers
ECI Election Commission of India
ERO Electoral Registration Officer
EVM Electronic Voting Machine
ICADR International Centre for Alternate Dispute Resolution
ICT Information Communication Technology
ILI Indian Law Institute
ITAT Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
NALSA National Legal Services Authority
NITI National Institute for Transforming India
NJA National Judicial Academy
NJDG National Judicial Data Grid
MCC Model Code of Conduct
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SVEEP Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation
UTRCs Under Trial Review Committees
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
VVPAT Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
C O N T E N T S
PAGES
1. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (i)
2. INTRODUCTION (ii)
3. REPORT (i) CHAPTER - I BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE MINISTRY
(ii) CHAPTER – II
OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR 2017-18
(iii) CHAPTER – III
DEMAND NO. 61 : LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
(iv) CHAPTER – IV
DEMAND NO. 62 : ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
(v) CHAPTER – V
DEMAND NO. 61 : DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
(vi) CHAPTER – VI
DEMAND NO. 61 : DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
(vii) CHAPTER – VII
DEMAND NO. 63 : SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
4. RECOMMENDATIONS/OBSERVATIONS AT A GLANCE
*5. RELEVANT MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
___________________ *To be appended at printing stage.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (Re-constituted on 1
st September, 2017)
1. Shri Bhupender Yadav Chairman
RAJYA SABHA
2. Shri Swapan Dasgupta
3. Shri Prabhat Jha
4. Shri Majeed Memon
5. Shrimati Rajani Patil
6. Shri D. Raja
7. Dr. K. Keshava Rao
8. Shri Sukhendu Sekhar Ray
9. *Shri Vivek K. Tankha
10. #Dr. Subramanian Swamy
LOK SABHA
11. Shri Tariq Anwar
12. Dr. Sanjeev Balyan
13. Shri Kalyan Banerjee
14. Shri Sharadkumar Maruti Bansode
15. Shri A.H. Khan Choudhury
16. Adv. Joice George
17. Shri Radadiya Vithalbhai Hansrajbhai
18. Shri Pralhad Joshi
19. Shri Mehboob Ali Kaiser
20. Adv. M. Udhaya Kumar
21. Shrimati Meenakashi Lekhi
22. Shri Bhagwant Mann
23. Shri B.V. Naik
24. Shri Vincent H. Pala
25. Shri Rajiv Pratap Rudy
26. Dr. A. Sampath
27. Shri Ram Prasad Sarmah
28. Shri V. Panner Selvam
29. Shri Varaprasad Rao Velagapalli
30. Adv. Anshul Verma
31. @Vacant
SECRETARIAT
Shri P.P.K. Ramacharyulu, Additional Secretary
Shri K.P. Singh, Joint Secretary
Smt. Sunita Sekaran, Director
Shri Ashok K. Sahoo, Addl. Director
Smt. Chanderlekha Sharma, Under Secretary
* Nominated w.e.f. 30
th November, .2017 vice Shri Anand Sharma who resigned w.e.f. 10
th November, 2017.
@ Vacancy caused due to changed the nomination of Shri Santosh Kumar w.e.f. 3
rd November, 2017.
# Nominated w.e.f. 7th
March, .2018 vice Shri Tiruchi Siva who resigned w.e.f. 21st February, 2018.
(i)
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
INTRODUCTION
I, the Chairman of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, having been authorised by the Committee to
submit the Report on its behalf, do hereby present this Ninety-sixth Report on Demands for
Grants (2018-19) pertaining to the Ministry of Law and Justice.
2. In accordance with the constitutional requirement under Article 113, the estimated
expenditure of Ministries/Departments of Government of India projected under various
Demands for Grants for the upcoming financial year need to be voted by Parliament. As a
sequel thereto, Demands for Grants of the relevant Ministries/Departments stand referred to
concerned Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee to make a close scrutiny
thereof under Rule 270 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of
States. While making scrutiny of Demands for Grants, the Committee has made an appraisal
of performance, programme, policies of the Ministry of Law and Justice vis-à-vis expenditure
made out of Consolidated Fund of India in the current financial year.
3. In the Report, scrutiny of Demand Nos. 61, 62 and 63 pertaining to the Ministry of
Law & Justice, Election Commission of India (ECI) and Supreme Court of India,
respectively, for the financial year 2018-19 has been made by the Committee.
4. During the course of examination of the above Demands, the Committee heard the
views of the Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs; Secretary, Legislative Department;
Secretary, Department of Justice; Deputy Election Commissioners, Election Commission of
India; the Registrars, Supreme Court of India; Member-Secretary, Law Commission of India;
Registrar, Indian Law Institute; President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Member-
Secretary, National Legal Services Authority and Registrar, National Judicial Academy in its
sitting held on the 23rd
February, 2018.
5. The Committee, while making its observations/recommendations, has mainly relied
upon the following:-
(i) Presentations made by the respective Secretaries of the three Departments of
the Ministry;
(ii) Presentations made by the heads of Organizations under administrative control
of the Ministry;
(iii) Detailed Demands for Grants of the Ministry, Election Commission of India
and Supreme Court of India for the year 2018-19;
(iv) Detailed Explanatory Notes on the Demands for Grants (2018-19) received
from the Ministry, Election Commission of India and Supreme Court of India;
(v) Annual Report of the Ministry for the year 2017-18 and the latest available
Annual Reports of the agencies/attached offices of the Ministry;
(vi) Written replies furnished by the Ministry and organizations/offices of the
Ministry to the Questionnaires sent by the Secretariat; and
(vii) Written clarifications to the points/issues raised by Members in the meeting of
the Committee.
6. The Report is based on facts, figures and submission (both oral and written) tendered
by Department/Institutions under the Ministry, to the Committee.
(ii)
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
7. The Committee considered and adopted the Report in its sitting held on the 13th
March, 2018 and presented to both Houses of Parliament on 14th
March, 2018.
8. For facility of reference and convenience, the observations and recommendations of
the Committee have been printed in bold letters in the body of the Report. New Delhi; BHUPENDER YADAV
13th
March, 2018 Chairman,
Department-related Parliamentary Standing
Committee on Personnel Public Grievances
Law and Justice
(iii)
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
1
R E P O R T CHAPTER - I
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE MINISTRY
INTRODUCTION
1. The Ministry of Law and Justice owes its origin to the Charter Act, 1833 enacted by
the British Parliament. In accordance with the Government of India (Allocation of Business)
Rules, 1961, the Ministry comprises three Departments, namely, Department of Legal
Affairs, Legislative Department and Department of Justice. The key mandate of the Ministry
is to provide policy support in administration of Justice; furnishing of legal advice to
Government of India and defend Government of India in various Courts and Tribunals and
draft Supreme and Subordinate legislations for Government of India, etc.
DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
1.1. The Department of Legal Affairs has a two-tier set-up, namely, the Main Secretariat
at New Delhi and Branch Secretariats at Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Bengaluru. The
Department tenders legal advice to all Ministries and Departments of Govt. of India. It
defends Govt. of India in all Courts and Tribunals where Govt. of India is a party. It appoints
Attorney General of India, Solicitor General of India, Additional Solicitor Generals of India
and Assistant Solicitor Generals of India. In addition, Govt. Counsel are also engaged to
defend Govt. of India in various courts across the country. It is responsible for maintenance
of standards of legal profession and legal education and is associated with legal reform also.
It is also responsible for appointment and renewal of Notaries across the country. Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Indian Legal Service and Law Commission of India are within the
administrative control of the Department. The Department has launched Legal Information
Management and Briefing System to monitor conduct of cases on behalf of Central
Government/Organisation/Departments etc its administrative control.
1.2. It inter-alia administers the Advocate Act, 1961, the Advocate Welfare Fund Act,
2001, the Notaries Act 1952 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It has also taken
initiatives to improve India’s ranking in “Ease of Doing Business Report” (World Bank) by
strengthening contract enforcement and arbitration mechanism.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
2
1.3. Following Institutions/organizations are under the overall supervision of the
Department of Legal Affairs:-
(a) Law Commission of India: - The Law Commission of India is a non-statutory
body, constituted by the Government once in three years. The present
Commission, the Twenty-first Law Commission of India, was constituted with
effect from 1st September, 2015 and will continue till 31st August, 2018. It is
headed by Dr. Justice Balbir Singh Chauhan and has two full-time Members,
one Member-Secretary, two Ex-officio Members and three part-time Members.
(b) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT): - ITAT is one of the oldest
Tribunals, set up under Section 252 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to hear appeals
against orders passed by authorities mentioned under Section 253 of the IT Act.
It has 63 Benches covering all cities having seat of High Courts.
(c) Bar Council of India (BCI): - The Bar Council of India is a statutory body
constituted under Section 4 of the Advocates Act, 1961, and it has been
empowered, among other things, to lay down standards of professional conduct
and etiquette for lawyers, and to maintain and improve the standards of legal
education in the country.
(d) International Centre for Alternate Dispute Resolution (ICADR):- The
International Centre for Alternate Dispute Resolution was registered under the
Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 31st May 1995. It is an autonomous
organisation working under the aegis of the Department.
(e) Indian Law Institute (ILI):- The Indian Law Institute is a premier legal
research institute founded on 27th December, 1956. The prime objective of the
Institute is to promote advanced studies and research in law and to contribute
substantially in reforming the administration of Justice, so as to meet the socio-
economic aspirations of the people through law and its instrumentalities. The
Institute has been granted Deemed University status in the year 2004.
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
1.4. One of the primary responsibilities of the Legislative Department is to draft bills on
behalf of Ministries and Departments of Govt. of India. In addition, Ordinance promulgated
by the President of India, Regulation made by President of India for Union Territories,
Electoral Laws and Electoral reforms, maintenance of the updated Central Legislation since
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
3
1836 under Bharat Sanhita (India Code) and authoritative translation of Central Legislation
and Constitution of India under the Authoritative Text (Central Laws) Act 1973, Publication
and preparation of standard legal terminology, etc. are also assigned to the Department under
Allocation of Business Rules, 1961.
2. It inter-alia administers Personnel laws, Electoral laws, the Indian Contract Act,
1872, the Evidence Act, 1872, the Indian Trust Act, 1882, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
the Limitation Act, 1963, the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Representation
of the People Act, 1951. It is also responsible for procurement of Electric Voting Machine
(EVM), Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) and reimbursement of Election
expenditure of State Assemblies.
1.4. The Department has following two wings under it:-
(i) Official Languages Wing: The Official Languages Wing has been entrusted
with the preparation and publication of a standard legal terminology and for
translating in Hindi of Central Acts and Ordinances and Subordinate
legislation etc. under the Official Languages Act, 1963.
(ii) Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan: The Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan is mainly concerned
with bringing out authoritative Hindi versions of reportable judgements of the
Supreme Court and the High Courts, with the objective of promoting the
progressive use of Hindi in the legal field. It brings out various publications of
legal literature in Hindi and also holds exhibitions for giving wide publicity to
legal literatures available in Hindi and to promote their sales.
1.5. Election Commission of India: Election Commission of India is an autonomous
constitutional authority created under Article 324 of Constitution for superintendence,
direction, control of elections to Parliament, State legislatures, and to the offices of the
President and the Vice-President of India. The Election Commission of India is a multi-
member body (since 1993) headed by the Chief Election Commissioner, who acts as
Chairman of the Commission. The Commission is assisted by Deputy Election
Commissioners, Chief Electoral Officers (CEO), District Election Officers (DEO) and
Electoral Registration Officers (ERO), appointed by the Election Commission under
Representation of People Act, 1951. It recognizes/derecognizes political parties and allots
symbols to them. It also implements Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for smooth conduct of
free and fair elections. It also observes 25th January every year as National Voters' day to
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
4
encourage young electors to take part in election process. There is an exclusive demand
(Demand No. 62) under which budgetary allocation is sought for running the activities of
Election Commission of India.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
1.6. The mandate of Department of Justice entails administration of justice, legal aid and
advice to weaker sections of the society and undertrials in jails, access to justice for
marginalised section of society, appointment/removal of judges of Supreme Court and High
Courts, Family Courts, Gram Nayalayas, infrastructural development of judiciary and
modernization of court complex, Second Judicial Pay Commission, National Legal Services
Authority, E-Courts, Judicial Service Centres, maintenance of National Judicial Data Grid,
etc. The Department also launched three new initiatives to improve justice delivery system,
namely, Nyaya Mitra- to reduce pendency, Tele Law-providing legal aid through Common
Service Centres and Pro-Bono Legal Scheme- a web based platform through which lawyers
can volunteer pro-bono services for under-privileged clients. It inter-alia administers the
Gram Nayalaya Act, 2008, the Legal Services Act, 1987 and the Family Courts Act, 1984. It
also observes Legal Services Day on 9th December every year.
1.7. The following institutions/autonomous bodies/policy initiatives come under the
administrative control of the Department:
(a) Supreme Court of India:- The Supreme Court of India is the highest
constitutional court and also the final court of appeal. The Supreme Court of
India has a exclusive Demand (Demand. 63).
(b) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA):- The National Legal Services
Authority has been constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is the patron-in-chief and second senior-most
judge of the Supreme Court is the Executive Chairman of the Authority.
NALSA monitors and evaluates implementation of legal aid programmes, and
lays down policies, principles, guidelines and frames effective and economical
schemes for the State Legal Services Authorities to implement the legal services
programmes throughout the country. The State Legal Services Authorities,
District Legal Services Authorities, Taluk Legal Services Committees, etc.
primarily discharge their functions by providing the following services
regularly:-
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
5
(i) Free Legal Services: It includes payment of court fee, process fee and all
other charges payable or incurred in connection with any legal
proceedings, providing service of lawyers in legal proceedings, etc.
(ii) Lok Adalats : Lok Adalat is one of the Alternative Disputes Resolution
Mechanisms. It is a forum where the disputes/cases pending in the court
of law or at pre-litigation stage are settled amicably. The Lok Adalat has
been given statutory status under the Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987. Under this Act, an award made by a Lok Adalat is deemed to be a
decree of a civil court and is final and binding on all parties and no
appeal lies against thereto before any court.
(c) Family Courts:- The Family Courts Act, 1984 was enacted with a view to
provide for establishment of Family Courts by the State Governments in
consultation with the High Courts to promote conciliation and secure speedy
settlement of disputes relating to marriage, family affairs and related matters. In
accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Act, the State Government
has to establish mandatorily Family Court for every area in the State comprising
a city or a town whose population exceeds ten lakh. In other areas of the States,
the Family Courts may be set up if the State Governments deem it necessary.
(d) National Judicial Academy:- The National Judicial Academy is an autonomous
body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and came into
existence with effect from 17th August, 1993. The affairs of the Academy are
managed by a Governing Council, which is chaired by the Chief Justice of India.
The registered office of the Academy is in the Supreme Court Building at New
Delhi and another office was established in August, 2000 at Bhopal. The main
objectives of the Academy are to impart training to the Judicial Officers of the
States/Union Territories and to study court management and administration of
justice in States and Union territories.
(e) National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms: It was set up in
August, 2011, and became fully functional with effect from the financial year
2012-13. The twin goals of the Mission include increasing access by reducing
delays and arrears in the system and enhancing accountability at all levels
through structural changes and setting performance standards and facilitating
enhancement of capacities for achieving such performance standards. The
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
6
schemes/initiatives under the Mission are Action Research and Studies on
Judicial Reforms, Access to Justice - Government of India Project, E-Courts
Phase-II, Infrastructure development of subordinate judiciary, reducing judicial
delays and improving justice delivery system etc.
(f) Centrally Sponsored Scheme: The government is implementing a Centrally
Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for development of infrastructure facilities for
judiciary since 1993-94. The scheme covers construction of court buildings and
residential accommodation for judicial officers/judges of District and
Subordinate courts. The fund sharing pattern of the Scheme has been revised to
60:40 (Centre: State) and 90:10 (Centre: State) for the eight North-Eastern and
three Himalayan States from 2015-2016. In November, 2017, the Union Cabinet
approved continuation of the Scheme up to 31st March, 2020 with an outlay of
Rs 3320 crore to be implemented in Mission Mode through the National
Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms.
(g) Computerization of District and Subordinate Courts
E-Courts Mission Mode Project (MMP) Phase - I & II:- This Project is being
implemented by the Department under the guidance of e-Committee, Supreme
Court of India to put in place a justice deliver system that possesses better
efficiency, accessibility, affordability, more transparency and set timeliness.
Initiated in 2010, the Phase-I of the Project concluded at a total cost of Rs
639.144 crore. The Phase II of the Project with an outlay of Rs 1670 crore,
commenced in August, 2015 and is set to conclude in 2019. The scheme
includes components such as computerisation of Courts, use of solar energy
under e-Courts Project, computerisation of the Public Prosecutors Office, video-
conferencing facility for jails, enhancement of ICT infrastructure of courts,
digitization of old case records, computerisation of Judicial libraries,
upgradation of application software, SMS based services, Touch Screen Kiosks.
(h) Establishment of Gram Nyayalayas under the Gram Nyayalayas Act,
2008 :- The Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 has been enacted by the Parliament to
provide for the establishment of the Gram Nyayalayas at the grass root level for
the purpose of providing speedy and inexpensive access to justice to the citizens
at their door steps. The Central Government meets fifty percent of the recurring
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
expenses incurred
subject to a ceiling
(i) Second National
Subordinate Judiciary
conditions of service
7
incurred on the setting up of these courts in the
ceiling of 3.20 lakh per Gram Nyayalaya per annum.
National Judicial Pay Commission (SNJPC) has been
Judiciary to examine the present structure of
service of Judicial Officers in the States and UTs.
the first three years,
annum.
been constituted for
of emoluments and
UTs.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
8
CHAPTER – II
AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS DURING 2018-19
2.0. The total proposed budgetary allocations for the Ministry of Law and Justice for the
financial year 2018-19 are shown under the following three Demands: -
(i) Demand No. 61 is the consolidated Budget Estimates pertaining to the
Department of Legal Affairs, the Legislative Department and the Department
of Justice under the Ministry of Law and Justice;
(ii) Demand No. 62 pertains to the Election Commission, which is under the
administrative control of the Legislative Department; and
(iii) Demand No. 63 pertains to the Supreme Court of India, which is under the
administrative control of the Department of Justice. The expenditure incurred
on the Supreme Court of India is ‘charged’ expenditure.
2.1. In the detailed Demands for Grants for the financial year 2018-19, the budgetary
allocations are depicted only by Revenue/Capital and Charged/Voted.
2.2. The Revenue/Capital, Charged/Voted break-ups of the budgetary allocations under
Demand Nos. 61, 62 and 63 for the financial year 2018-19 are given below:-f
TABLE No. - I
Demand Nos. 61, 62 & 63 at a Glance ( in crores)
Demand No. Total Revenue Capital Charged Voted
61 – Ministry of Law & Justice (Department of Legal Affairs, Department of Justice and Legislative Department)
4386.33 2586.33 1800 - 4386.33
62 – Election Commission of India 267.96 248.66 19.30 - 267.96
63 – Supreme Court 251.06 251.06 - 251.06 -
Grand total 4905.35 3086.05 1819.30 251.06 4654.29
2.3. Out of the total allocation of 4386.33 crore for Demand No. 61 of the Ministry of
Law and Justice, 2586.33 is allocated in revenue side, which accounts for 59% (approx.).
Similarly, out of the total allocation of 267.96 crore under Demand No.62 for the Election
Commission India, 248.66 crore is allocated for revenue expenditure, which accounts for
93% (approx.). Under Demand No. 63, 251.06 crore, which is 100% ‘revenue
expenditure’, is sought for Supreme Court of India.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
9
DEMAND NO. 61
MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE
Summary of proposed Budget Estimates 2018-19
2.4. The Committee has been informed by the Ministry that against the projected demand
of Rs 6550.38 crore under Demand No. 61 in BE 2018-19, the Ministry of Finance has
provided a total allocation of only Rs 4386.33 crore, which is a shortfall of Rs 2164.05 crore
(33.03%). Details of Scheme/Non-scheme, Revenue/Capital wise approved allocation by the
Ministry of Finance as well as variation from BE/RE 2017-18 are as under:
TABLE NO. – II
Demand No. 61 – Budget at a Glance ( in crore)
BE 2017-18 RE 2017-18 BE 2018-19 Variation over
Scheme Non-scheme
Scheme Non-scheme
Scheme Non-scheme
BE 2017-18
RE 2017-18
Revenue 1061.70 2010.69 1016.41 1642.52 1127.00 1459.33 15.8% (decrease)
2.7% (decrease)
Capital
0.00 1071.27 0.00 1531.00 0.00 1800.00
68% (increase)
17.5% (increase)
Total
1061.70 3081.96 1016.41 3173.52 1127.00 3259.33
Grand total
4143.66 4189.93 4386.33 5.85% (increase)
4.68% (increase)
2.5. There is an increase of 46.27 crore in RE (2017-18) over BE (2017-18) and an
increase of 242.67 crore in BE (2018-19) over BE (2017-18) for the Ministry of Law and
Justice. There is a decrease of around 2.7% in BE 2018-19 over RE 2017-18 in the revenue
side and an increase of 17.5% in the capital side.
TABLE NO. – III
Department-wise allocation in BE 2018-19 ( in crore)
Sl. No. Department Revenue Capital Total Scheme Non-Scheme
1 Department of Legal Affairs
0.00 219.40 70.00 289.40
2 Legislative Department 0.00 1126.10 1730.00 2856.10
3 Department of Justice 1127.00 113.83 0.00 1240.83
Total 1127.00 1459.33 1800.00 4386.33
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
10
2.6. The allocations to different components under the Scheme head are as under.
TABLE NO. – IV
Schemes under Demand No. 61
Sl. No. Name of the Unit/Scheme BE 2018-19
A National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms (Central Sector)
1. E-Courts Phase-II 430.30
2. Grant in Aid to NER 49.70
3. Action Research and Studies on Judicial Reforms
2.00
4. Access to Justice – Govt. of India (NEJK) 15.00
*5. Access to Justice for Marginalized in India UNDP (SAJI)
0.00
Total(A) 497.00
B Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary (Centrally Sponsored Scheme)
1. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-States 507.00
2. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-UT with Legislature 50.00
3. Assistance to State Governments for establishing and operating Gram Nyayalayas
8.00
4. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-UT with Legislature 2.00
5 Grant in Aid to NER of Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary 63.00
Total 630.00
Grand Total 1127.00
*Phase II of the Project has completed in December, 2017
2.7. Department-wise percentage change in allocation in BE 2018-19 over BE 2017-18
and variation between projections made and proposed allocation in BE 2018-19 is given
below.
TABLE NO. - V Department-wise allocation and percentage change in allocation over BE 2017-18
(Figure in crore )
Sl. No.
Name of the Department
BE 2017-18 RE 2017-18 Projections made to MoF for 2018-19
BE 2018-19 % change BE 2017-18
to BE 2018-19
Variation between
projections and BE
2018-19 (%)
REVENUE CAPITAL
REVENUE CAPITAL REVENUE CAPITAL TOTAL
1. DEPT. OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
245.40 71.26 255.16 31.00 351.94 219.40 70.00 289.40 -8.61 (-) 18
2. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
1625.89 1000.01 1247.33 1500.00 4872.19 1126.10 1730.00 2856.10 +8.77 (-) 41
3. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
1201.10 0.00 1156.44 0.00 1326.24 1240.83* 0.00 1240.83 +3.31 (-) 6
TOTAL 3072.39 1071.27 2658.93 1531.00 6550.38 2586.33 1800.00^
GRAND TOTAL 4143.66 4189.93 6550.38 4386.33 +5.86
*This includes 1127.00 crore for Schemes implemented by the Department of Justice.
^Out of this, 1730.00 crore is for procurement of EVMs, VVPAT, etc. and the balance 70.00 crore is for ITAT.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
11
Department of Legal Affairs
2.8. The Committee has been informed that the budgetary allocations for the Department
of Legal Affairs are under Non-scheme only. Further, as against the projection of 351.94
crore, the Department of Legal Affairs was allocated 289.40 crore only, which is 6.6 per
cent (approx.) of the total allocation under Demand No. 61. The Department has submitted
that no impact is envisaged of the reduced allocation on the working of the Department in
view of the current expenditure trends and also due to the facts that no schemes and
programmes are implemented by the Department of Legal Affairs. However, the Department
has also informed that subject to requisite approval, it envisages setting up a dedicated
scheme to provide grants to academic bodies for research activities/seminars, training
programmes and Legal Information Management and Briefing System (LIMBS).
2.9. The following table is indicative of the increase/decrease from BE and RE (2017-18)
in the allocation in BE (2018-19) and expenditure of Department of Legal Affairs up to 5th
February, 2018.
TABLE NO. - VI
Department of Legal Affairs ( in crore)
NON-SCHEME
Sl. No.
Major Head/Name of the Unit BE 2017-18
RE 2017-18
Expenditure up to
05.02.2018
% expenditure of RE 2017-18
BE 2018-19
Increase/ Decrease (BE-BE)
1. 2052: Department of Legal Affairs 56.12 55.17 41.36 74.87 54.55 -1.57
2. 2052: Central Agency Section 9.54 9.53 7.33 76.92 9.54 0.00
3. 2020: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)
98.34 96.34 70.53 73.20 90.35 -7.99
4. 2020: National Tax Tribunal 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
5. 2070: Law Commission 15.72 12.45 10.74 86.24 7.38 -8.34
6. 2052: Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange(ATFE)
11.53 11.53 *4.26 36.95 0.00 -11.53
7. 2014: Legal Adviser and Counsels 54.13 70.13 55.79 79.55 57.58 3.45
8. 2014: International Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution(ICADR)
0.01 0.01 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
9. 2070: International Law Association (ILA)
0.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
10. 4070: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) (Capital Outlay)
71.00 31.00 **13.63 43.98 70.00 -1.00
11. 4070: National Tax Tribunal (NTT) (Capital Outlay)
0.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
12
12. D/O Legal Affairs 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.25
13. Deduct Recovery of unspent Balance of Grant-in-Aid
0.00
Total 316.66 286.16 203.64 71.16 289.40 -27.26
Capital 71.26 31.00 13.63 43.96 70.00 -1.26
Revenue 245.40 255.16 190.01 74.46 219.40 -26.00
* As ATFE merged the Appellate Tribunal under the SAFEMA, funds allocated to ATFE could not be fully utilized.
** Construction of office-cum-residential complex for ITAT Lucknow Bench, purchasing of land for ITAT Kolkata
Bench, has not materialized so far. However, balance amount of 17.37 crore presently available is likely to be utilised for the office space in the proposed World Trade Centre, at Nauraoji Nagar, New Delhi.
2.10. It may be seen from the table above that in BE (2018-19) there is a decrease of
27.26 crore over BE (2017-18) and an increase of 3.24 crore over RE (2017-18). Major
portion of the allocation of the Department is for the Legal Advisers & Counsels and for
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which also includes acquisition and construction of
building for Benches of ITAT in different parts of the country. It is also observed that the
overall expenditure as on 5.02.2018 is just 71.16 percent and on the capital side it is just
43.96 percent.
Legislative Department
2.11. The Committee has been informed that the budgetary allocations for the Legislative
Department are under Non-scheme only. Further, as against the projection of 4872.19 crore,
the Legislative Department has been allocated only 2856.10 crore, including 1730 crore
as Capital allocation for purchase of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable
Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) for the Election Commission of India. The allocation for the
Legislative Department is 65% (approx.) of the total allocation under Demand No. 61.
2.12. The following table is indicative of the increase/decrease from BE and RE (2017-18)
in the allocation in BE (2018-19) and expenditure of Legislative Department up to
5th February, 2018.
TABLE NO. – VII Legislative Department
( in crore)
NON-SCHEME
Sl. No.
Name of the Unit/ Scheme
BE 2017-18
RE 2017-18
Expenditure up to
05.02.2018
% expenditure
of RE 2017-18
BE 2018-19
Increase/ Decrease (BE-BE)
1. Legislative Department 24.20 22.80 18.00 78.9 23.14 -1.06
2. Official Language Wing 10.64 10.64 8.86 83.2 10.24 -0.40
3. Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan 6.44 5.44 4.37 80.3 5.60 -0.84
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
13
4. Elections (Reimbursement to State/UTs)
1584.61 1208.45 1023.58 84.7 1056.35 -528.26
5. EVMs 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 30.77 30.77
6. Token Amount for Institute for Legislative Drafting and Research (Capital Outlay)
0.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
TOTAL (Revenue) 1625.90 1247.33 1054.81 84.5 1126.10 -499.80
7. EVMs for Election Commission (Capital)
1000.00 1500.00 833.90 55.6 1730.00 730.00
TOTAL 2625.90 2747.33 1888.71 68.7 2856.10 230.20
2.13. It may be seen from the table above that there is a total increase of 230.20 crore in
BE (2018-19) over BE (2017-18), which is mainly on account of increase in allocations under
the Head ‘EVMs for Election Commission’.
Department of Justice
2.14. The allocation for Department of Justice is 1240.83 crore, which includes 113.83
crore under Non-Scheme and 1127 crore under Scheme side, and it is 28 per cent (approx)
of the total allocation under Demand No.61.
2.15. The following table is indicative of the increase/decrease from BE and RE (2017-18)
in the allocation in BE (2018-19) and expenditure of Department of Justice up to 5th
February, 2018.
TABLE NO. - VIII
Department of Justice ( in crore)
SCHEME S.No. Name of the Unit/Scheme BE
2017-18 RE
2017-18 Expenditur
e up to 21.02.2018
% expenditure of RE 2017-18
BE 2018-19
Increase/ Decrease (BE-BE)
A National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms (Central Sector)
1. E-Courts Phase-II 372.75 341.99 363.29
96.8 430.30 57.55
2. *Grant in Aid to NER 43.25 33.01 49.70 6.45
3. Action Research and Studies on Judicial Reforms
2.00
1.26
1.06
84.1 2.00 0.00
4. Access to Justice – Govt. of India (NEJK)
7.50
3.94
3.94
100 15.00 7.50
5. Access to Justice for Marginalized people in India (SAJI) (Phase II), EAP
7.00 7.00 6.28
89.7 0.00 -7.00
Total (A) 432.50 387.20 374.57 96.7 497.00 64.50
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
14
B Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary (Centrally Sponsored Scheme)
1. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-States
478.28 472.58
558.20
89.8
507.00 28.72
2. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-UT with Legislature
75.00 75.00 50.00 -25.00
3. CSS for Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary-UT with Legislature
5.00 5.00 2.00 -3.00
4. Grant in Aid to NER of Development of Infrastructure of Judiciary
62.92 68.63 63.00 0.08
5. Assistance to State Governments for establishing and operating Gram Nyayalayas
8.00 8.00 8.00 100 8.00 0.00
Total (B) 629.20
629.21 566.20
89.9 630.00 0.08
Total (A) + (B) 1061.70 1016.41 940.77 92.5 1127.00 65.30
*Allocated under eCourt Project Phase II for computerisation of courts in North Eastern States.
TABLE NO. - IX ( in crore)
NON-SCHEME
S. No.
Name of the Unit/Scheme
BE 2017-18
RE 2017-18
Expenditure up to
05.02.2018
% expenditure
of RE 2017-18
BE 2018-19
Increase/ Decrease (BE-BE)
1. Department of Justice 9.35 12.14 7.45 61.3 12.93 3.58
2. Secretariat expenditure of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms
2.90 2.20 0.98 44.5 2.26 -0.64
3. National Judicial Academy
16.00 16.00 13.00 81.25 11.15 -4.85
4. Special Courts (Family Courts)
0.01 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 -0.01
5. National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)
8.85 7.40 3.37 45.5 5.20 -3.65
6. NALSA (Grants-in-Aid)
100.00 100.00 54.40 54.4 80.00 -20.00
7. Supreme Court Legal Service Committee (SCLSCE)
2.29 2.29 1.28 55.8 2.29 0.00
Total (Non-Scheme) 139.40 140.03 80.48 57.5 113.83 -25.57
2.16. As against the projection of 1326.24 crore, the Department of Justice was allocated
1240.83 in BE (2018-19). It may be seen from the table above that there is a total increase
of 65.30 crore in BE (2018-19) over BE (2017-18) for Schemes, mainly on account of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
15
increased allocation in BE (2018-19) for E-Courts Phase-II, Action Research and Studies on
Judicial Reforms, Grant in aid to NER and slight increase in allocation for CSS for
infrastructure of judiciary. However, the Department has informed that there is a shortfall of
Rs 480.00 crore, Rs 268.28 crore and Rs 3.5 crore vis-à-vis the projections made for three
major Schemes, viz. CSS for infrastructure of judiciary, E-Courts Phase-II and Access to
Justice – GoI (NEJ&K). Also, NALSA too has not received funds as per the projection made
by it. The projection was for Rs 140 crore, whereas the allocation is only Rs 80 crore.
DEMAND NO. 62
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
2.17. Election Commission India is a constitutional authority created under Article 324 of
Constitution. The entire expenditure incurred by the Election Commission of India is Voted.
2.18. Budgetary allocation of Rs 267.96 crore has been proposed for the financial year
2018-19, of which Rs 248.66 crore is the revenue expenditure and Rs 19.30 crore is the
capital expenditure for construction of IIIDEM campus. The revenue expenditure accounts
for 93 per cent (approx.) of the total proposed allocation.The variation between BE 2018-19
over BE 2017-18 and that between BE 2018-19 and projections made to MoF are reflected in
the table below.
TABLE NO. - X
Budget at a Glance ( in crore)
BE ( 2017-18)
RE (2017-18)
Projections to MoF for BE 2018-19
BE (2018-19)
Variation of BE 2018-19 over
BE 2017-18 RE 2017-18 Projection made to MoF
146.00 189.79 413.82 267.96
R: 248.66 C: 19.30
(+) 121.96
(+) 78.17 (-) 145.86
2.19. The Commission has informed that there is an increase of 83.53% in BE (2018-19)
over BE (2017-18), which is mainly due to increase in provision for Information Technology
(628.17%), Voters’ Awareness (80.58%) and Training (87.86%). Variation in BE 2018-19
over RE 2017-18 is also mainly due to increase in provision in the same heads. However,
provision in Capital Section has been decreased in BE 2018-19 by 41.52% and 73.12% in
comparison to BE 2017-18 and RE 2017-18, respectively. The Commission has submitted
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
16
that the funds allocated under the capital section are insufficient and proposal for additional
funds may be moved to the Ministry of Finance at appropriate time so that the construction
work of the IIIDEM campus and purchase of land from DDA for construction of additional
office for Election Commission do not get affected for want of funds.
DEMAND NO. 63
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2.20. The Supreme Court of India is the highest constitutional court and also the final court
of appeal. The expenditure incurred on the Supreme Court of India is ‘charged’ on the
Consolidated Fund of India. Accordingly, entire Demand No. 63 is a ‘charged’ expenditure.
2.21. Budgetary allocation of Rs 251.06 crore has been proposed for the financial year
2018-19. The entire demand consists of Revenue expenditure only. The variation between BE
2018-19 over BE 2017-18 and that between BE 2018-19 and projections made to MoF are
reflected in the table below.
TABLE NO. - XI Budget at a Glance
( in crore)
BE ( 2017-18)
RE (2017-18)
Projections to MoF for BE 2018-19
BE (2018-19)
Variation of BE 2018-19 over
BE 2017-18 RE 2017-18 Projection made to MoF
247.00 255.00 251.06 251.06 (R)
(+) 4.06 (-) 3.94 0
2.22. There is an increase of 8 crore in RE (2017-18) over BE (2017-18). However, there
is a decrease of Rs 3.94 crore in BE 2018-19 over RE (2017-18).
OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
2.23. The Committee observes that in BE (2018-19), allocation to the Ministry was
enhanced by 242.67 crore over BE (2017-18). Similarly, allocations of Election
Commission of India and Supreme Court of India were enhanced by 121.96 crore and
4.06 crore respectively. However, the allocation in BE (2018-19) is substantially low as
compared to projection by the Departments under the Ministry and the Election
Commission of India. As per the data provided, the Ministry had projected a
requirement of ₹ 6550.38 crore for BE 2018-19 to the Ministry of Finance, against which
an allocation of only ₹ 4386.33 crore has been approved, which is just 67% of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
17
allocation sought from the Ministry of Finance. Similarly, the Election Commission of
India had projected a requirement of Rs 413.82 crore, against which an allocation of
only ₹ 267.96 crore has been approved, which is just 65% of the allocation sought from
the Ministry of Finance. This indicates that either the projections of the
Ministry/Commission were overestimated or they have received inadequate funds.
2.24. The Ministry of Law and Justice and organisations under its administrative
control play a very important role in bringing reforms in the Indian Legal System to
achieve expansion, inclusion and excellence in legal education, the legal profession and
legal aid services. They need sufficient funds to cater to their requirements; to execute
ongoing schemes/programmes and to initiate new schemes/programmes. Thus, the
Committee strongly recommends that the Ministry and its organizations are allocated
sufficient funds in the FY 2018-19 to carry out its mandate and additional requirement
of funds may be provided at the RE stage. The Committee makes similar
recommendation for the Election Commission of India so that the activities of the
Commission are not hampered due to paucity of funds.
2.25. The Committee after analyzing the trend of expenditure in the FY 2017-18 in the
Ministry observes that as on 21st February, 2018, the Ministry has been able to spend
about 92 percent of the funds under schemes. However, the spending under the non-
scheme heads is only 71.16, 68.7 and 57.5 percent, respectively, for the Department of
Legal Affairs, Legislative Department and Department of Justice as on 5th February,
2018. As per the instructions of the Ministry of Finance, expenditure in the last quarter
is to be restricted to 33% ceiling and last month (March) expenditure to 15% ceiling.
Thus, performance of the Ministry in terms of utilization of funds under schemes leaves
much to be desired. A focused planning and close monitoring of utilization of funds is
required on the part of the Ministry. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the
Ministry should identify the bottlenecks responsible for not being able to maintain the
pace of utilization required as per the instructions of the Ministry of Finance and take
remedial measures so as to improve its performance in utilization of scheme funds in the
future.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
18
CHAPTER - III
DEMAND NO. 61: LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
3.1. The major portion of the Legislative Department’s Budget is meant for election
expenses and purchase of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) and Voter-Verified Paper
Audit Trail (VVPAT). They are to reimburse the expenditure incurred on the conduct of
Elections to the State Governments/UTs.
The Department had proposed the requirement of 4872.09 crore against which the Ministry
of Finance has allocated 2625.9 crore in BE (2018-19), which is a shortfall of 2246.19
crore (54 per cent approx.) against their projected demand. Against BE (2017-18) of 1000
crore, an amount of 1730 crore has been allocated in BE (2018-19), an increase of 730
crore over BE (2017-18), which is 73 percent approx. The increase is due to procurement of
EVMs, VVPATs etc., by Election Commission keeping in view the Lok Sabha Election in
the year 2019.
Official Languages Wing
3.2. Official Languages Wing of the Legislative Department is responsible for preparing
and publishing standard legal glossary and also for translating into Hindi, all the Bills to be
introduced in Parliament, all Central Acts, Ordinances, subordinate legislations, etc., as
required under the Official Languages Act, 1963. This Wing is also responsible for arranging
translation of the Constitution, Central Acts, Ordinances, etc., into the Official Languages as
specified in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution as required under the Authoritative Texts
(Central Laws) Act, 1973. As per the Eight Schedule of the Constitution, 22
languages(Assamese, Bengali, Bodo, Dogri, Gujarati ,Hindi ,Kannada ,Kashmiri ,Konkani,
Maithili, Malayalam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Odia, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Santali, Sindhi,
Tamil, Telugu, Urdu) are recognized as scheduled language. However, the Secretary,
Legislative Department during the meeting of the Committee on the Demands for Grants
(2018-19) submitted that as against the total strength of 151 in Official Language Wing, they
have only 15 language officers in their Regional Language wing. An amount of 10.24 crore
has been allocated to the Official Language Wing in BE (2018-19) which is a decrease of
0.4 crore over the allocations of 10.64 crore in BE (2017-18).
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
19
Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan (VSP)
3. 3. Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan brings out various publications of legal literature, including
law books and law journals, in Hindi containing Hindi translations of selected judgments of
the Supreme Court and High Courts on cases pertaining to constitutional, civil and criminal
laws. An amount of 5.60 crore has been allocated to the Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan in BE
(2018-19) which is an increase of 0.16 crore over the allocations of 5.44 crore in RE
(2017-18).
3.4. There are twenty two languages specified under VIII Schedule of the
Constitution which includes six classical languages i.e. Tamil, Sanskrit, Malayalam,
Kannad, Telugu and Odia. Article 343 stipulates that the official language of the Union
shall be in Hindi in Devanagri Script and English. The Official Language Act, 1963 and
the Official Language Rules, 1970, promotes use of Hindi progressively in official work
in addition to English. Article 345 of the Constitution mentions that official language of
a State may be one or more languages or Hindi or English. Article 120 of the
Constitution mentions that the business in Parliament shall be transacted in Hindi or in
English. Similarly Article 210 mentions that the business in the legislature of a State
shall be transacted in the official language of the State or in Hindi or in English. Article
351 cast duty upon the Union Government to promote Hindi having special reference to
composite culture of India and for its vocabulary reliance is placed primarily on
Sanskrit and secondarily on other languages. Article 350 gives a constitutional right to
every citizen of the country to send petition to any authority of the Union or the State in
any languages used in the Union or in the State as the case may be.
3.5. Out of twenty two languages specified VIII Schedule of Constitution. The
Legislative Department brings out authoritative texts of Constitution in sixteen
languages. Those are Assamees, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannad, Telugu, Tamil,
Kashmiri, Konkari, Malayalam, Marathi, Punjabi, Odia, Urdu, Sindhi, Sanskrit and
Nepali. The Legislative Department is responsible for translation of Central Legislation
both supreme and subordinate in languages mentioned in VIII Schedule of the
Constitution. The Constitution of India also needs to be made available in those
languages. The Legislative Department in their submission informed the Committee
that the updated diglot edition of Constitution is to be published, while Constitution in
other languages have not yet been updated in other languages. The Committee,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
20
therefore, exhorts the Department to expedite authoritative translation of Constitution
and other Central Legislation complied on Bharat Sanhita (India Code) for
popularisation of law amongst people speaking those languages.
3.6. The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirteenth Amendment) Bill, 2010 changed
the name of Orissa to Odisha and the Oriya language to Odia. However, in the Annual
Report, 2017-18 of the Ministry old nomenclature is still used. The Department is
accordingly, recommended to update and use the new nomenclature in future reports.
3. 7. The Committee also recommends the Department to use simple day to day
vocabulary in Hindi, wherever possible, and simply the legal terminology for the
understanding of the common people of the country. The Department may also explore
the possibility of creating a separate webpage where all the Acts/Ordinances/Rules
translated by it in regional languages are available. The Committee further
recommends the Department to recruit more language officers or engage experts or
consultants so that legal texts and documents could be simplified and translated in
regional languages for the understanding of the common people.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
21
CHAPTER - IV
DEMAND NO. 62: ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
4.0. The entire expenditure of the Election Commission of India (ECI) is ‘voted’. The
proposed allocation in BE (2018-19) is 267.96 crore, against the projected requirement of
413.82 crore, which is a shortfall of 145. 86 crore (35 per cent approx.). The Major
reduction has been done under the Information Technology, i.e., 108.33 crores, as against
the projection of 223.31 crore, Systematic Voters' Education and Electoral
Participation (SVEEP) i.e., 43.34 crores, as against 71 crore. The BE (2018-19) exceeds
the RE (2017-18) by 78.17 crore, which is an increase of 30 per cent (approx).
4.1. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee on the
Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that the General Election to the Legislative
Assemblies of Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat were held in 2017-18. General Elections to the
Legislative Assemblies of Meghalaya, Nagaland and Tripura would be held in Financial Year
2017-18. Moreover, some bills related to Financial Year 2016-17 were cleared in Financial
Year 2017-18. The 26.30 crore have been allocated in BE (2018-19) as the India
International Institute of Democracy and Election Management (IIIDEM) campus in likely to
be operational in the next financial year and Training Division would run in its optimal
capacity.
4.2. The Committee observes that as against the projection of 413.82 crore, only
267.96 crore have been allocated in BE (2018-19), which is a short fall of 145.86 crore
(35 percent approx), with major reductions being under the head Information
Technology and voters awareness. The Committee is of the view that with the increased
penetration of internet in the country and focus of the Government on programmes like
Digital India to reach out to common people, information technology has become
crucial medium to reach large number of voters in a very short time. However, the
Committee notes that the allocation under the head Information technology and voters
awareness is less than the projected demand, which may affect the activities of the
Commission in the coming General Elections to the Lok Sabha in 2019. The Committee,
accordingly, recommends that, if needed, allocations for it should be enhanced suitably
at RE stage so that activities of the ECI are not adversely affected due to want of funds.
Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP)
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
22
4.3. The Commission has taken up a Systematic Voters Education and Electoral
Participation (SVEEP) programme countrywide with the objective of maximizing voters’
turnout during elections. SVEEP entails a series of activities at the field level and is also
related with training and exchange of good practices within and outside the country. The
Phase-III of the Project was launched on 25th January, 2016. The project document lays down
the SVEEP strategy for the next five years 2016-2020 based on which the annual action plan
of the State/UTs and districts will be chalked out. It involves creating voters awareness and
electoral participation, electoral education, engaging civil society, promoting ethical voting
etc. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee on the
Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that they have started preparation for the General
Election to the Lok Sabha in the year 2019 and hence 43.43 crore has been provided in
Grants-in Aid-General under Voters awareness in BE (2018-19) to reach targeted groups and
raise voters awareness.
4.4. The Committee appreciates programmes like Systematic Voters Education and
Electoral Participation (SVEEP) as it feels that they are very important to raise voters
awareness about the importance of election in a democracy and right and
responsibilities of citizens, which in-turn are very important in increasing voters turn-
out. The Committee, accordingly, reiterates its recommendations contained in Ninety-
first Report of the Committee on the Demands for Grants (2017-18) that important
initiatives like SVEEP should not be crippled for want of adequate funds. However, the
Committee is also pained to note that as on September, 2017, the Actual Expenditure of
the Commission under the Head Voters Awareness was only 8.4 crore and
accordingly, recommends the ECI also to project its demands realistically in its future
demands.
INDIA INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DEMOCRACY AND ELECTION MANAGEMENT (IIIDEM)
4.5. The India International Institute of Democracy and Election Management (IIIDEM)
was launched in June, 2011 in its premises to assess training requirements of election staff
and impart training to the officers of the country. IIIDEM has also organised training
programmes form election officials from developing country from Asia and Africa.
4.6. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire informed the Committee
that construction of campus of India International Institute of Democracy and Election
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
23
Management (IIIDEM) would be completed in next financial year and then ECI would be in
a position to utilize optimally its Training Division’s capacity and additional expenditure on
various establishment related exercise and conduct of training programmes would be required
in the new campus. International training and capacity building programmes were undertaken
by the IIIDEM during the Financial Year 2017-18.
TABLE NO. -XII
TRAINING PROGRAMMES AT IIIDEM
Year No. of Programmes
No. of Training Days at IIIDEM
No of Master Trainers Trained
at IIIDEM
2015-16 66 240 857
2016-17 391 908 14532
2017-18 (till January, 2018) 133 422 4500
4.7. The Committee appreciates the activities of the IIIDEM and of the considered
opinion that after the completion of permanent campus of the Institute this year its
activities/programmes would go-up further. The Committee also appreciates the
initiatives of IIIDEM in conducting training programmes for election official of others
countries and desires that appropriate measures may be taken to invite more and more
countries, especially developing countries to built human resource capacities and
promote India’s global standing.
COMMON ELECTORAL ROLL
4.8. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee on the
Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that there are 87,53,72,057 electors enrolled in the
electoral rolls, 2018 as against 86,69,13,278 electors in the electoral roll, 2017 (Annexure--).
Ongoing revision, 2018 shows net increase of 0.98 % in electors over previous electoral roll.
4.9. The Election Commission of India (ECI) and State Election Commissions (SECs) are
two constitutional bodies which have been entrusted to conduct free and fair election to
Parliament, State Legislatures and Local Self-Bodies. The former body is responsible to
conduct free and fair election to Parliament and State Legislatures under Article 324 of the
Constitution while the latter is vested with the power of conducting election to Panchayat Raj
Institutions (PRIs) and Municipal Bodies under Articles 243K and 243 Z(A) of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
24
Constitution. The preparation of Electoral roll for the election of above mentioned bodies lies
with Election Commission of India and respective State Election Commissions. The
Registration of Electoral Rules, 1960 provides procedure for preparation, publication and
revision of electoral roll. Summary revision of electoral roll is done every year by the ECI for
which 1st January of the year is chosen as the cut off date for inclusion of new names and
exclusion of some of the old voters. While some of the State Election Commissions use the
Electoral Roll prepared by ECI for conducting election to PRIs and Municipal Bodies in their
State while other States prepare their electoral roll de novo. Be that as it may, the voter is the
same even though they are called upon to exercise their constitutional right (Right to Vote) at
different election and at different point of time.
4.10. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee on the
Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that it has been receiving requests from several
State Election Commissions from time to time to evolve software for preparing common
electoral rolls for local body elections and Assembly/Parliamentary elections. They further
submitted that it would be difficult for the Commission to undertake such massive exercise
for all the 78 crore electors in the country as there is no uniform system for preparation of
rolls by State Election Commission in States and it would not be possible for the ECI to
collect the data of panchayat, municipal body and ward number and feed it in the database. In
BE (2017-18) 300 crore is proposed allocation against the projected demand of 500 crore.
4.11. The Committee notes that preparation of Electoral roll involves huge
expenditure, manpower and time. Preparation of electoral roll by ECI and SECs
involves some amount of duplication of efforts as the voter is the same for election to
different bodies. It is understood that common electoral roll would save time, money
and manpower of the nation besides removing inconsistencies between two sets of
electoral roll and resultant confusion in the mind of the voter. It also limits the scope for
electoral malpractices. The Committee accordingly, reiterates its recommendation
contained in the 75th Report of the Committee on the Demands for Grants (2015-16) and
impresses upon the Election Commission of India and the State Election Commissions
to conduct various elections from local bodies to Parliament on the basis of a common
electoral roll. The Committee also recommends the ECI to co-ordinate with and
convinces the State Election Commissions to update the voter database already
available online for the purpose of PRIs and Municipalities elections. The Committee
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
25
also recommends the Legislative Department to bring out amendment in the extant
legislations for evolving a common electoral roll.
ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE (EVMs) AND VOTER VERIFIABLE PAPER
AUDIT TRAIL SYSTEM (VVPAT)
4.12. Taking advantage of the technological development, overcome problems associated
with use of ballot papers and removing the possibilities of invalid votes totally, the Election
Commission of India in December, 1977 mooted the idea of EVM. The law was amended by
the Parliament in December, 1988 and a new section 61A was inserted in the Representation
of the People Act, 1951 empowering the Commission to use voting machines. The amended
provision came into force w.e.f. 15th March, 1989. Accordingly, the Government appointed
the Electoral Reforms Committee in January, 1990 consisting of representative of several
recognized National and State Parties. The Electoral Reforms Committee further constituted a
technical Expert Committee of the Electoral Reforms Committee (1990) was of the
conclusion that the electronic voting machine is a secure system and unanimously
recommended in April, 1990 the use of the electronic voting machines without further loss of
time. Since 2000, EVMs have been used in 107 General Elections to State Legislative
Assemblies and 3 General Elections to Lok Sabha held in 2004, 2009 & 2014.
4.13. Certain additional features were introduced in 2006 in ECI-EVMs such as dynamic
coding between Ballot Unit (BU) and Control Unit (CU), installation of real time clock,
installation of full display system and date and time stamping of every key-pressing in EVM.
Technical Evaluation Committee in 2006 has concluded that any tempering of CU by coded
signals by wireless or outside or Bluetooth or WiFi is ruled out as CU does not have high
frequency receiver and data decoder. CU accepts only specially encrypted and dynamically
coded data from BU. Data from any outside source cannot be accepted by CU.
4.14. ECI based on consultation with political parties in 2010 considered to explore use of
Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) with a view to enhance transparency.
Introduction of VVPAT implied that a paper slip is generated bearing name and symbol of
the candidate along with recording of vote in Control Unit, so that in case of any dispute,
paper slip could be counted to verify the result being shown on the EVM. Under VVPAT, a
printer is attached to the balloting Unit and kept in the voting compartment. The paper slip
remains visible on VVPAT for seven seconds through a transparent window. The
Commission used VVPAT in Nagaland bye election in 2013 and the Supreme Court of India
directed the Government for the ordered introduction of VVPAT in phased manner. The
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
26
Commission proposes to implement VVPAT at every polling station in the next General
Election to Lok Sabha due in 2019. So far, VVPATs have been used in 255 Assembly
Constituencies and 09 Parliamentary Constituencies. In Goa elections in 2017, VVPAT was
employed in all 40 Legislative Assembly Constituencies1.
4.15. The EVMs are procured from Central Public Sector Undertakings, BEL and ECIL.
The BEL has its unit in Bengaluru and ECIL has its unit in Hyderabad. However, the one
time programmable micro-chip used in EVM is imported and is tamper-proof. EVM and
VVPAT are under the custody of Election Commission of India but budgetary provisions are
routed though Legislative Department. The VVPATs are purchased by the Commission from
the budget grant to Ministry of Law and Justice. However, expenditures on use of VVPATs
viz. First Level Checking of VVPATs, Preparation of VVPATs, Technical support of the
engineers of the manufacturers (BEL/ECIL) etc, in elections are borne by the State
Government in case of State Legislative Assembly election, Central Government in case of
House of the People and 50:50 basis between Central and State Governments in case of
simultaneous elections.
4.16. The Commission in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee on the
Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that it has placed orders for procurement of 16.15
lakh VVPATs machines by September, 2018 for use in upcoming Lok Sabha Election, 2019.
The Government has already sanctioned the project and made provision for necessary funds.
As of now the Commission has received 1.4 lakh (approx) out of the total order. Both PSU’s
have committed to supply the ordered quantities of VVPATs by September, 2018.
TABLE NO. – XIII
Year wise break-up of cost of EVM & VVPAT
Sl. No.
Financial Year
EVM VVPAT EVM (BU & CU) & VVPAT
BU Qty Basic Cost @ Rs.7700/-
CU Qty Basic Cost @ Rs.9300/-
VVPAT Qty
Basic Cost @ Rs.16000/-
Total Basic Cost
1 2 3 4=(3x7700) 5 6=(5x9300) 7 8=(7x16000) 9=(4+6+8)
1 2016-17 550000 4235000000 545000 5068500000 443000 7088000000 16391500000
2 2017-18 410000 3157000000 314000 2920200000 510000 8160000000 14237200000
3 2018-19 435306 3351856200 71716 666958800 662066 10593056000 14611871000
2016-19 1395306 10743856200 930716 8655658800 1615066 25841056000 45240571000
1 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=159351
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
27
ELECTORS PHOTO IDENTITY CARDS
4.17. An amount of 100 crores was kept in BE (2018-19) under the head ‘Issue of Photo
Identity Cards to voters’ against 42.34 crore in RE (2017-18).
4.18. With 99.29 percent coverage rate, the scheme of issuing the EPICs is a continuous
and ongoing process and there is no time limit for its completion. For the short fall, the
Commission referred to the problems of coverage in States like Assam, Chhatisgarh, and
Jammu Kashmir etc.
TABLE NO. - XIV
Statement Showing the Status of Epic, 2017
S.No. Name of the State EPIC %
1 Andhra Pradesh 100.00
2 Arunachal Pradesh 99.60
3 Assam 96.21
4 Bihar 100.00
5 Chhattisgargh 97.97
6 Goa 99.71
7 Gujarat 100.00
8 Haryana 100.00
9 Himachal Pradesh 100.00
10 Jammu & Kashmir 92.91
11 Jharkhand 99.79
12 Karnataka 100.00
13 Kerala 100.00
14 Madhya Pradesh 100.00
15 Maharashtra 95.81
16 Manipur 100.00
17 Meghalaya 100.00
18 Mizoram 100.00
19 Nagaland 98.20
20 Orissa 98.15
21 Punjab 100.00
22 Rajasthan 99.13
23 Sikkim 100.00
24 Tamil Nadu 99.91
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
28
25 Telangana# 100.00
26 Tripura 100.00
27 Uttrakhand 100.00
28 Uttar Pradesh 99.98
29 West Bengal 100.00
30 Andaman & Nicobar Islands 98.88
31 Chandigarh 100.00
32 Dadra and Nagar Haveli 100.00
33 Daman and Diu 100.00
34 National Capital Territory of Delhi 100.00
35 Lakshadweep 100.00
36 Puducherry 100.00
ALL India 99.28
4.19. The Committee appreciates the steps undertaken by the Commission for EPIC
coverage in most of the States of the country. The Committee hopes that the Election
Commission would achieve the target of 100 percent before the next General Election to
Lok Sabha especially in States like Assam, Chhatisgarh and Jammu & Kashmir. The
Committee further recommends the Commission to improve photo quality of the
Elector Voter Identity Card, as in many cases it becomes difficult to recognize person in
the card, which in turn raises the probability of mal-practices during the voting by the
elector.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
29
CHAPTER - V
DEMAND NO. 61: DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
5.0. The Department of Legal Affairs is a service-oriented Department and the Budget of
the Department is mainly salary-based. It includes expenditure for Branch Secretariats of the
Department, Central Agency Section, Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Law
Commission of India (LCI), payment to Legal Advisers and counsels and grants-in-aid to
Indian Law Institute (ILI).There is no Scheme side allocation. Table No. - VI in Chapter II
provides the budgetary allocations in respect of the constituents of Department of Legal
Affairs for the year 2018-19.
Variation of the Allocations over the Financial year 2017-18
5.1. There is an increase of Rs 3.24 crore in BE 2018-19 over RE 2017-18 and a decrease
of Rs 27.26 crore over BE 2017-18.The Department has submitted the reasons for variation
between RE 2017-18 and BE 2018-19 in respect of the units i.e. Legal Adviser and Counsel,
Law Commission and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) (Capital) as under:
(a) Legal Adviser and Counsel - There is a decrease of ₹ 12.55 crore (17.90%) in
BE 2018-19 due to settlement of arrear bills of Government Counsel fees in
Supreme Court/High Court during 2017-18.
(b) Law Commission of India - There is a decrease of ₹ 5.07 crore (40.75%) in BE
2018-19 due to less demand in RRT since Law Commission shifted to Lok
Nayak Bhawan. Earlier the office of the Law Commission of India was
accommodated in the premises of Hindustan Times House at 14th Floor, K. G.
Marg, New Delhi, which was rental accommodation @ ₹ 78 lakh (approx.) rent
per month. In the month of July, 2017, the Law Commission of India has been
shifted to Government accommodation (i.e. Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market
New Delhi). Therefore, the funds earlier required for payment of rent, are not
required. There will be no adverse impact on the functioning of Law
Commission due to said reduction in the budget.
(c) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)– It had submitted projection of ₹
109.34 crore for BE 2018-19 to Ministry of Finance, which allocated ₹ 90.35
crore only. Therefore,there is a decreased of ₹ 5.99 crore in BE 2018-19 from ₹
96 crore in RE 2017-18.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
30
(d) ITAT (Capital) - There is an increase of Rs 39.00 crore in BE 2018-19 mainly
due to ITAT proposal to purchase Building in Delhi from National Building
Construction Company (NBCC).
5.2. Also, the Department of Legal Affairs had proposed 351.94 crore for BE (2018-19)
but received only 289.40 crore, which is a shortfall of 62.54 crore (18%). The Secretary,
Department of Legal Affairs during his deposition before the Committee on Demands for
Grants (2018-19) submitted that the funds allocated in RE 2017-18 are being utilized
satisfactorily, with71.16% of the funds being utilised till 5.02.2018. He apprised the
Committee of the Department’s performance and achievements. In this regard, he also inter
alia, informed that a web portal “Legal Information and Management Based System” has
been launched with the aim to have centralized data regarding court cases by or against the
Union of India and its digital monitoring. It is being implemented in 64 Ministries of the
Government and 208 Departments/attached Offices and it has more than 2.42 lakh cases in its
platform.
Future initiatives
5.3. The Committee was also informed about future initiatives during the Financial Year
2018-19, which include proposed amendment in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996to
promote International Commercial Arbitration, expeditious arbitral award, speedy
appointment of Arbitrator, etc; proposed amendments to the Commercial Courts Commercial
Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 to expand the scope
of the Commercial adjudication effectively and expeditiously and also to further improve
India’s rank in the World Bank Report on Doing Business; firming up ingredients of National
Litigation Policy including legal audit and litigation impact assessment; formulation of a new
Legal Research & Education Promotion Development Scheme (LREPDS), etc.
Requirement of additional funds
5.4. During the course of the meeting of the Committee on 23rd February, 2018, the
Committee had sought a note from the Department regarding requirement of additional funds.
In response, the Department in its written replies has submitted that it needs more funds for
the following purposes:
(a) To create a dedicated funding mechanism: It has been submitted that it is
crucial to create a dedicated funding mechanism, by way of budgetary support,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
31
in the Department to support its outreach and creation of academic, research and
policy data base. Presently, limited fund has been provided for creation of
capital assets and support to establishment expenses of various grantee
institutions in the legal research and education domain. Accordingly, the
Department proposes to formulate a new Legal Research & Education
Promotion Development Scheme (LREPDS), at an initial project cost of approx.
₹ 25 crore per year. The objective of the Scheme is to facilitate (i) creation of
knowledge products through legal policy research studies, survey, data banks,
strengthening of assets and resources in legal training and education areas, etc.,
(ii) dissemination of knowledge through conduct of seminars and conferences,
imparting training to officials in Department of Legal Affairs, etc. to facilitate
development of legal research & education, and (iii) the Scheme also aims to
upgrade LIMBS to ensure effective data sharing, monitoring and curtailment of
legal cases on behalf of the Union of India and its Organisations, Departments,
etc. through Web based applications. In addition, a Cell of ‘National Litigation
Monitoring’ will be constituted to transform the system, which will minimize
the number of litigations, through clubbing of court cases and online dispute
resolution at pre-litigation stage.
(b) Additional funds requirement for ITAT under the Budgetary sub-head
‘Capital Outlay’ in BE 2018-19: The Department has submitted that at present,
construction work of office-cum-residential complex of ITAT, Bengaluru and
Cuttack Benches is going on. Apart from this, CPWD has been requested to
draw estimated proposal for construction of office-cum-residential complex for
ITAT, Lucknow Bench. Further, the Nation Building Construction Company
(NBCC) declared ITAT as successful bidder for purchase of office space at the
proposed World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Total estimate cost of the office
space is Rs 237 crore, out of which Rs 5.00295 crore has been paid and an
amount of Rs 101.3 crore will be required to be paid during the financial year
2018-19. Therefore, the proposed allocation of Rs 70 crore in BE 2018-19 will
not be sufficient and may affect the construction work of ongoing projects.
Since the entire developments for purchasing of office space at the proposed
World Trade Centre, New Delhi took place in January, 2018, this aspect could
not be taken into account while making projection for BE 2018-19 to the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
32
Ministry of Finance. The Department has, accordingly, requested that the
allocation may be enhanced from Rs 70 crore to Rs 117crore.
5.5. The Committee notes that the Department proposes to take some steps aimed
towards curtailment of legal cases on behalf of the Union of India and its Organisations,
Departments, etc. and requires budgetary support for the same. The Committee
recognizes that the Government and its various agencies are the predominant litigants
in courts and tribunals in the country. It feels that all necessary steps must be taken to
reduce Government litigation in courts so that valuable court time is spent in resolving
other pending cases so as to reduce average pendency time. In view thereof, the
Committee recommends that adequate budgetary support should be provided to the
Department to formulate and implement the proposed Legal Research & Education
Promotion Development Scheme (LREPDS).
5.6. The Committee also notes that Department in its written replies to the
questionnaire has submitted that at present, there is no specific policy in vogue on
litigation. A ‘National Litigation Policy’ was drafted in the year 2010 but has not been
finalized so far. At present, it is under active consideration of the Government. The
Committee recommends that the ‘National Litigation Policy’ should be finalized and
implemented by the Government on a priority basis to reduce delays and arrears in the
system in order to achieve the objectives of the National Mission for Justice Delivery
and Legal Reforms.
5.7. The Committee observes that Rs 70 crore has been allocated to ITAT under the
Budgetary sub-head ‘Capital Outlay’ in BE 2018-19 but the same will not be sufficient
and may affect the construction work of the ongoing projects. It has an additional
requirement of funds to the tune of Rs 47 crore. The Committee recommends that the
budgetary allocation for acquisition of land and construction of buildings for ITAT
under the Major head 4070 should be enhanced from Rs 70 crore to Rs 117 crore in RE
2018-19 so that their projects are not stalled. The Committee also notes that under this
sub-head, the pace of utilization of funds by ITAT has been slow over the years, leading
to steep reduction of funds at the RE stage. The Budget allocation for 2017-18 was Rs 71
crore, which was reduced at the RE stage to Rs 31 crore. ITAT has been able to utilize
only 43.98% of the funds allocated in RE 2017-18 up to 5th February, 2018. The
Committee, therefore, recommends that the ITAT and the Department should ensure
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
33
proposed projects timely commence, and there should be strict monitoring of their
progress and the pace of expenditure, so as to avoid fund reduction at the RE stage by
the Ministry of Finance.
Challenges before the Department: Shortage of staff
5.8. The Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs also stated during his deposition before
the Committee that inadequate staff strength is posing a serious challenge before the
Department. He informed that the Department has a total sanctioned strength of 813 posts,
which include Indian Legal Service (ILS), Secretariat Services and other isolated categories.
The post-wise details of vacancy position as on 31st December, 2017 provided by the
Department of Legal Affairs and the remedial action being taken, in respect of (i) Indian
Legal Service (ILS) Cadre (sub-cadres Legal Advisers Service and Government Advocates
Service) is at Annexure I (ii) General Civil Service (GCS) Cadre is at Annexure-II (iii)
Central Secretariat Service (CSS), Central Secretariat Stenographer Service (CSSS), Central
Secretariat Clerical Service (CSCS), Central Secretariat Official Language Service (CSOLS)
and posts of Accountant and Junior Accountant under the GCS Cadres is at Annexure-III.
TABLE NO. – XV
Vacancies in the Department – At a Glance
Sl. No. Cadres Sanctioned strength In-position strength Vacancy
1. ILS cadre 110 69 41 (37.3%)
2. GCS cadre 340 252 88 (25.8%)
3. Other categories 363 289 74 (20.4%)
Total 813 610 203 (24.96%)
5.9. As regards the vacancies in the ILS cadre, the Department of Legal Affairs has
informed that the recruitment to the posts under the ILS is made in accordance with the
provisions of the Indian Legal Service Rules, 1957 as amended from time to time. These
Rules provide for direct recruitment at the level of Grades II (Director level), III (Deputy
Secretary level) and IV (Under Secretary level). However, recruitment at the level of Grades
III and II has been marred by litigation and the Department has not been able to fill vacancies
existing in these grades. As a result, in the Legal Advisers Cadre, there are no Deputy Legal
Advisers (Grade II) appointed on regular basis in the Department and consequently the feeder
cadre for Additional Legal Adviser (Grade III) has no officer. Recently, the Department has
filed an SLP before the Supreme Court challenging the order of the High Court of Delhi
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
34
related to recruitment in the grade of Deputy Legal Adviser. The Department has submitted
that it is its earnest desire to get the matter decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court at the
earliest and thereafter get the vacant posts filled to achieve the desired staff strength of ILS
officers.
5.10. The Department has further informed that the vacancies in various grades belonging
to following cadres are filled up on the basis of nominations received from the Departments
mentioned against their names:-
TABLE NO. –XVI
Sl. No. Name of the Cadres Name of the Department from which nominations are received for filling up the vacancies
(i) CSS, CSSS, CSCS Department of Personnel and Training (DoP&T)
(ii) CSOLS Department of Official Language (DoOL)
5.11. The shortage of manpower in the posts belonging to above mentioned cadres is due to
non-receipt of nominations from DoP&T and DoOL. The vacancies in the grades of
Accountant and Junior Accountant belonging to GCS Cadre could not be filled up as the
Recruitment Rules of these posts are being amended. It has been submitted that the
Department has been constantly taking up the matter with the Department of Personnel and
Training and it is likely that some personnel will be posted against the existing vacancies and
the incumbency position will improve. During the deposition of the Secretary, Department of
Legal Affairs, Member-Secretary, Law Commission was also present and he submitted that
there is a shortage of ILS officers in the Commission also and suggested that Recruitment
Rules of ILS officers needs to be revised.
5.12. The Department of Legal Affairs has also informed that it is in the process of making
necessary amendments in the Indian Legal Service Rules, 1957 to provide for direct
recruitment in Grade IV of the Service only and filling up of the posts in the higher grades by
the method of promotion. The proposal for amendments in these Rules is in advanced stage
and is likely to be finalized very soon and thereafter it will be taken up with the Department
of Personnel & Training first and the Union Public Service Commission thereafter. The
process of amendment of these Rules is likely to take some time but once the amendments are
made, it will be possible for the Department to fill up the vacancies in the higher Grades III
and II from amongst those holding posts in Grade IV of the service on regular basis.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
35
5.13. The Committee observes that there is an overall shortage of manpower of around
25% in the Department and the situation is even worse in the ILS cadre, where around
37% of the posts are lying vacant. The Committee notes that this is a perennial problem
in the Department and the Committee had recommended for urgent redressal of the
causes responsible for this state of affairs in its Ninety-first Report also. Further, the
Committee infers from the reply of the Department that the remedial actions being
taken by it are not yielding the desired results and there are still huge vacancies existing
in the Department.
5.14. The Committee expresses its serious concern over the acute shortage of officers
in the Department, particularly of the ILS cadre. The ILS officers are the Principal
Legal Advisers to the Government and play a pivotal role in both advisory as well as in
drafting work and their persistent shortage is sure to affect adversely the functioning of
the Government.The Committee, accordingly, recommends that the causes responsible
for this state of affairs should be identified and proactive steps, including expediting the
amendment of the Indian Legal Service Rules, 1957, must be undertaken to fill up the
existing vacancies in a time bound manner. Present pace of efforts to fill up vacancies is
inadequate and an effective mechanism in consultation with the concerned agencies like
DoPT, UPSC and SSC, should be evolved for timely filling of vacancies. The Committee
further suggests that the Department should proactively pursue the court cases for early
decisions. Further, in the Action Taken Replies to this Report, the Committee may be
informed about the timelines for filling up of vacancies in different grades in the
Department.
LAW OFFICERS
5.15. During the deposition of the Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs in the meeting of
the Committee on 23rd February, 2018, he was asked to provide the vacancy position of Law
Officers. The Department in its written replies has submitted that the present
incumbency/vacancy position of Law Officers is that there the post of Solicitor General of
India, is vacant.
5.16. Besides, there are 11 posts of Additional Solicitor General of India (ASG) for the
Supreme Court, out of which currently, 05 of the posts are filled up and proposal for the
appointment to 04 other posts have been referred for approval of the Appointment Committee
of the Cabinet (ACC).
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
36
5.17. With regards to the position of the Law Officers before the various High Courts, there
are only 12 posts of Additional Solicitor General of India, out of which 10 posts for the High
Courts of Allahabad, Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Karnataka, Madras, Patna, Punjab & Haryana,
Rajasthan and South Zone have been filled up and 02 posts are currently lying vacant for the
High Courts of Jharkhand & Gujarat.
5.18. The Committee observes that of the total sanctioned strength of 25 Law Officers,
9 posts (36%) are presently lying vacant, including the post of Solicitor General of
India, who is second law officer of the country and assists the Attorney General of
India. The Law Officers are entrusted with the responsibility of advising the
Government of India on legal matters referred to them; appearing before the Supreme
Court and any High Court on behalf of the Government of India in cases in which the
Government of India is concerned as a party or is otherwise interested; representing the
Government of India in any reference made by the President to the Supreme Court
under Article 143 of the Constitution; etc. In view of such important duties entrusted to
them, the Committee feels that it is vital for the Government to fill these vacancies
expeditiously so that its functioning is not affected adversely.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT)
5.19. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is a quasi judicial body set up in January, 1941
and specializes in dealing with appeals under the Direct Taxes Act. The orders passed by the
ITAT are final; an appeal lies to the High Court only if a substantial question of law arises for
determination. The ITAT has also introduced use of information technology for early
disposal of appeals by introducing e-court, i.e. hearing through video conferencing.
Strength of Members and Staff
5.20. As per the information available in the Annual Report (2017-18) of the Ministry of
Law and Justice, the sanctioned strength of Members of Tribunal is 126 (including 1 post of
President and 9 posts of Vice President) for 63 Benches, which are spread over 28 cities
throughout the country. However, out of 126 only 96 Members are in position and 30 posts of
Members are vacant. At present,6 posts of Vice-Presidents and 24 of Members are vacant. As
regards shortage of staff, all 7 sanctioned posts of Deputy Registrars are lying vacant. Out of
38 posts of Assistant Registrar, 30 are lying vacant. Further, out of 126 sanctioned posts of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
37
Senior Private Secretaries, 32 are lying vacant and out of 47 sanctioned posts of Private
Secretaries, 25 are lying vacant. Besides this, 258 posts are lying vacant in other categories.
5.21. The Annual Report (2017-18) further states that due to vacancy in the posts of
Members, some of the Benches are not functioning regularly, resulting in increase of
pendency. With regard to filing-up of vacancies of Members, the Department of Legal
Affairs in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee has submitted that it
proposes to issue necessary advertisement for inviting applications for appointments to the
post of Members (Judicial/Accountant) in the ITAT during this calendar year 2018.
Pendency of Appeals
5.22. The Committee was informed of the pendency of the appeals was 91643, as on 31st
December, 2017. The detailed statement showing year-wise institution, disposal and
pendency in the ITAT since 2004 to 2017 is as under:-
TABLE NO. –XVII
Year Institution Disposal Disposal rate
Pendency at the end of
year
Total no. of
Members
No. of vacant posts
2004-2005 57331 78901 137.6% 137164 90 36
2005-2006 45283 73979 163.3% 108468 97 29
2006-2007 43192 65524 151.7% 86136 97 29
2007-2008 44356 59653 134.4% 70839 99 27
2008-2009 40372 55889 138.4% 55322 100 26
2009-2010 41648 49353 118.5% 47617 89 37
2010-2011 44250 36293 82.01% 55574 81 45
2011-2012 42346 33816 79.8% 64104 88 38
2012-2013 43934 33752 76.8% 74286 84 42
2013-2014 46031 31886 69.3% 88643 77 49
2014-2015 45072 30494 67.7% 103238 69 57
2015-2016 40087 51010 127.2% 91971 94 32
2016-2017 48328 48385 100.1% 92386 101 25
2017-18 Up to
31.12.2017 36384 37678
103.5% 91643 96 30
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
38
Efforts for Reduction of Pendency
5.23. In their written replies to the questionnaire, the Department of Legal Affairs has
informed that it had reviewed the reasons for increasing pendency in the ITAT and observed
that the average disposal rate of appeals by each Member of the ITAT was above 70 during
the year 2004-05, which later came below 40. In this regard, the Department had requested
ITAT to take necessary steps to increase monthly disposal rates by each Member of the
Tribunal. During the current financial year 2017-18 (up to 31.12.2017), ITAT has disposed of
37678 appeals. The data reveals that during the 9 months of this financial year, an average of
50 appeals have been disposed of by each Member of the Tribunal.
5.24. The Department of Legal Affairs has further submitted that in the ITAT Vice-
Presidents Conference held on 8th& 9thSeptember, 2017 at ITAT, New Delhi, following
decisions were taken to improve the rate of disposal of appeals and stay granted matters.
(i) Improvement in the disposal of appeals:-It has been decided that all the
Members should give the required disposal, i.e. 50 appeals per month and the
Vice-Presidents or the Senior Members of the respective zones should ensure
that Members in their zones give requisite disposals of appeals.
(ii) To ensure disposal of stay granted matters within a period of 180 days for
which stay is granted:-It has been decided that the stay granted appeals
should be disposed of within a period of six months and the adjournments in
stay granted matters should not be given for more than a month. All efforts
should be made to dispose of the stay granted matters within the prescribed
period. It was also decided that constitution of regular Benches should be
framed for the whole week i.e. five days and the stay applications should be
heard by the respective Bench on Friday.
(iii) Sending of regular touring benches at non-functional benches:-It has been
decided that the touring Benches should be sent to all non-functional Benches
regularly, so that pendency of appeals in such Benches does not pile up.
5.25. The Department has also informed that the Appellate Tribunal has instructed all its
Benches to scrutinize and identify the cases which are covered by decisions of ITAT, High
Courts and the Supreme Court and to post them on priority basis. The Bars have also been
requested to bring to the notice of ITAT, all such covered cases for out of turn posting.
Besides, Search & Seizure cases and Appeals u/s 263 are also being given priority in their
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
39
disposal. Further, vide Finance Act 2016 an amendment in Income Tax Act, 1961 has been
made that the appeal involving assessed income upto Rs.50 lakhs can be heard by Single
Member Bench and accordingly the same has been implemented. The pendency figure of
Single Member cases was 13,978 in January, 2017, which has come down to 8379 in
December, 2017. The ITAT has also introduced use of information technology for early
disposal of appeal by introducing e-court, i.e. hearing through video conferencing. All these
steps have proven effective to reduce the pendency of appeal in ITAT.
5.26. As per the Annual Report (2017-18) of the Ministry of Law and Justice, presently
there are 6 Benches functioning through E-Court, viz. New Delhi(Zonal Office), Ahmedabad
(Zonal Office), Kolkata (Zonal Office), Jabalpur Bench, Rajkot Bench and Guwahati Bench.
Bench proceedings were conducted at ITAT Rajkot, Jabalpur Bench and Guwahati Bench
connecting to ITAT, Ahmedabad, Delhi and Kolkata Benches, respectively. Up to 31st
December, 2017, a total of 1273 appeals were disposed of at ITAT, Ahmedabad, 32 at ITAT,
Delhi and 146 at ITAT, Kolkata Benches. Further, development of E-Court in respect of 11
more ITAT Benches is under process.
5.27. The Committee observes that as per the data provided by the Department, a
large number of vacancies exist in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal across the board.
This is a long standing issue and is a matter of serious concern, particularly with respect
to vacancies in the post of Members of the Tribunal. The Committee fails to understand
why no solution has been found to deal effectively with this problem even after so many
years. The Department has itself admitted that due to vacancy in the posts of Members,
some of the Benches are not functioning regularly, resulting in increased pendency. The
Committee expresses its dismay over this state of affairs and urges the Government to
analyse the causes responsible for the perennial problem of shortage of manpower in
the Tribunal and take immediate remedial measures to fill the vacancies in a time
bound manner so that the Tribunal functions optimally. Also, in the Action Taken
Replies on the recommendations contained in this Report, the Department should
submit a roadmap for filling of vacancies in the post of Members well in time to ensure
that all the Benches of the Tribunal can function regularly.
5.28. The Committee notes that between 2004-05 and 2009-10, the disposal rate was
much higher than the number of cases instituted. The trend reversed between 2010-11
and 2014-15. Then again from 2015-16 onwards the rate of disposal has been higher
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
40
than the institution rate, as a result of which pendency has come down from more than
1 lakh cases in 2014-15 to around 92,000 cases as on the 31stDecember, 2017. The
Committee observes that though, with the existing strength of Members, the pendency is
not growing but a huge backlog of cases continues to exist, which is a cause of serious
concern. The Committee has been informed of the series of measures being taken by the
Tribunal to reduce pendency of cases and that in this financial year up to 31st
December, 2017, an average of 50 appeals have been disposed of by each Member of the
Tribunal, which though is an improvement but is not commensurate with the disposal
rate of the year 2004-05. The Committee is of the view that the existing rate of disposal
is not likely to make a major dent in the backlog cases and without improving
incumbency of Members, the pendency situation is likely to remain grim. Besides, there
could be other factors also contributing to the pendency in the Tribunal. The
Committee recommends that the Department should undertake a comprehensive cause
analysis exercise for this state of affairs and take remedial measures urgently so that the
pendency shows substantial improvement and the Tribunal truly lives up to its motto of
‘Nishpaksh Sulabh Satvar Nyay’, which means impartial, easy and speedy justice. In
the Action Taken Replies to this Report, the Committee would like to be apprised of the
findings of the above exercise and the impact of the measures being taken by the
Tribunal, as stated above, to reduce pendency.
INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE
5.29. The Indian Law Institute (ILI) is a premier legal research institute setup in 1956 to
promote and conduct legal research. The objectives of the Institute as laid down in its
Memorandum of Association are to cultivate the science of law, to promote advanced studies
and research in law so as to meet the social, economic and other needs of the Indian people,
to promote systematization of law, to encourage and conduct investigations in legal and allied
fields, to improve legal education, to impart instructions in law, and to publish studies, books,
periodicals, etc.
5.30. The Institute is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act,
1860. The membership of the Institute is now over three thousand, representing the persons
interested in the study and advancement of law. Hon'ble Chief Justice of India is the ex-
officio President of the Institute. The Union Minister of Law & Justice is its Ex-officio Vice-
President. The Attorney General for India, some Judges of the Supreme Courts and High
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
41
Courts, Solicitor General of India, Chairman, Law Commission and University Grant
Commission and other prominent lawyers and law professors etc. are the members of the
Governing Council. The Institute was granted Deemed University status in the year 2004 and
during the same period it started LLM programme. Besides PhD in Law and LLM,
programmes on Alternative Dispute Resolution, Corporate Laws & Management, Cyber Law
and Intellectual Property Rights laws are conducted by ILI. The Institute has also been
awarded the accreditation rating of ‘A Grade’ by the National Assessment and Accreditation
Council (NAAC) in March, 2017.
5.31. The Institute receives a recurring grant from the Department of Legal Affairs to meet
its establishment related expenses and it also generates some funds on its own through course
fees, membership fees, sale of publications, etc. It is proposed to provide grants-in-aid of Rs
3 crore in BE 2018-19, which is an increase of Rs 1 crore over BE 2017-18. The Director, ILI
during the Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted before the Committee that since it is the
only institute of legal research in the country, it may be accorded the status of ‘Institute of
National Importance’. However, the Department of Legal Affairs in their reply to the
questionnaire of the Committee submitted that the grant of status of Institute of National
Importance to ILI requires holistic examination of various impacting factor, inter alia,
including availability of adequate assets and resources in terms of academic research and
infrastructure, and the same would be undertaken in concert with ILI.
5.32. Further, in its written submission to the questionnaire of the Committee, ILI has
informed that the total sanctioned strength of the Teaching staff in the Institute is 19, out of
which 8 posts were lying vacant as on 17th January, 2018 and in the Non-teaching staff, 41
post are lying vacant out of the sanctioned strength of 81 employees. It has also been
submitted that the present strength of teaching and non-teaching staff is sufficient to meet the
requirement of the Institute, as it is running only one batch of LLM (One Year) programme
along with four Evening Diploma Courses and Ph.D. programme. It has further been
informed that the number of courses was reduced due to more emphasis on research activities
of the Institute, which is the main objective of the Institute.
5.33. The Committee in its Seventy-fifth, Ninety-first and Ninety-fourth Reports had
recommended that ILI should move towards making itself financially independent from
Government grants. In response to the query regarding steps taken by the Institute to make
itself self-sustainable, the Institute has replied in writing that its main objective is to promote
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
42
and conduct legal research and due to more emphasis on research activities of the Institute, it
is not in a position to generate more revenue by introducing any new academic programme.
5.34. The Committee applauds the Indian Law Institute for the quality legal research
work being done by it. However, the Committee fails to appreciate the reluctance of the
Institute to become fully self-sustainable even after six decades of its establishment and
more than a decade after being granted deemed university status. The Committee notes
that there has been a persistent shortage of Teaching and Non-teaching staff in the
Institute but in the year 2017-18, only the post of Librarian was advertised. The
Committee notes with dismay that the Institute in not making any serious efforts to fill
vacant positions and is content to work with the existing staff strength. It is not inclined
to introduce more academic programmes and has also informed that it has reduced the
number of courses offered for greater emphasis on research activities. The Committee
feels that the Institute will not be deviating from its objective of promoting and
conducting legal research by expanding its academic activities. On the contrary, it will
be fulfilling its objective, which is also to promote the improvement of legal education,
and to impart instruction in law and allied fields. The Committee reiterates that the
vacant positions in ILI should be filled-up immediately so that it is able to expand its
activities and move in the direction of becoming a self-sustaining Institute, and avoid
being a permanent drag on public funds. However, Government funds may continue to
be provided for a limited period till it becomes fully self-sustained. As regards the
request of the Institute that it may be accorded the status of ‘Institute of National
Importance’, the Committee recommends that the Department of Legal Affairs should
examine the issue and share its opinion with the Committee.
NOTARIES APPOINTMENT
5.35. The administration of the Notaries Act, 1952 and the Notaries Rules, 1956 are within
the purview of the Notary Cell of the Department of Legal Affairs. As per the Schedule under
Rule 8(4A) of the Notaries Rules, 1956, Central Government has fixed the quota of
maximum number of Notaries to be appointed by the Central Government as well as
maximum number of Notaries to be appointed by State/UT Government. Central Government
enhances the quota allotted to State Governments on receipt of request for the purpose from
the State Government concerned. The Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs during the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
43
meeting of the Committee on the Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that in the year
2017, 224 Notaries were appointed and 2249 Notaries Certificates were renewed.
Appointment /Renewal procedure of Notaries
5.36. The Department in its written replies to the questionnaire of the Committee and
queries raised by the Members of the Committee during it meeting held on 23rd February,
2018 has informed that the applications for appointment as Notary are not invited by issuing
advertisement as the Notaries Act and the Notaries Rules framed thereunder do not provide
for issuance of advertisement. The interested candidates apply suo moto for the notoryship.
From 01.01.2016, online application system for appointment as notary has been introduced
and an advocate aspiring to be a Notary is now required to apply online.
5.37. All the submitted applications are examined by the Competent authority, who is
appointed by the Central Government and is an Officer of the Indian Legal Service. The
Competent authority rejects the application in case the applicant does not possess the
qualification specified in Rule 3 or if any previous application of the applicant for
appointment as Notary was rejected within 6 months before the application and the applicant
is informed accordingly.
5.38. If the application is not rejected and is complete in all respects, then a letter is issued
to the concerned Bar Council requesting to confirm whether the name of the said advocate is
still borne on the roll of the advocates maintained by it and that no disciplinary proceedings
are pending against the applicant. The applicant is also requested to submit an affidavit
deposing that he/she is neither a notary appointed by any State Government nor his/her
application is pending with the concerned State Government. After receipt of the
confirmation from the Bar Council and the affidavit from the applicant, the Competent
Authority places it before the concerned Interview Board constituted by the Central
Government. On receipt of the recommendation of the Interview Board, the appropriate
Government considers the recommendations and either the application is allowed for the
whole or any part of the area to which it relates or it is rejected.
5.39. If the application is allowed, then an appointment letter for depositing the prescribed
fee of Rs 2000/- for issue of Certificate of Practice is issued to the applicant. On receipt of the
fees, the certificate is prepared and issued to the applicant by the Competent Authority, with a
validity of 5 years. Further, Rule 8B of the Notaries Rules provides for renewal of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
44
Certificate of Practice for a further period of 5 years on the payment of prescribed
fees of Rs 1000/-. It stipulates that any application for renewal of certificate of practice
shall be submitted before six months of its expiry. However, Government may after
considering the reasons stated in the application, relax the condition of submission
of application for renewal of certificate of practice before the specified period.
Composition of the Interview Board
5.40. In its written reply to the questionnaire, the Department of Legal Affairs has informed
that under Rule 7A (2) of the Notaries Rules, the appropriate Government is empowered to
constitute one or more Interview Boards from amongst its officers dealing with legal matters
and the Chairperson of every Interview Board is an officer not below the rank of Joint
Secretary or Law Officer of the Government concerned.
Criteria for assessment of candidates by the Interview Board
5.41. The Department has informed that it has issued Guidelines to be followed by the
Interview Board for conducting interviews, as per which while selecting the candidates for
appointment as notaries, the Board shall ensure that the percentage in respect of the following
categories’ of candidates shown against each of them is maintained as far as possible:
Scheduled Caste (15%), Schedule Tribe (7 1/2%), Other Backward Class (27%), Women
(33%), Physically challenged (3%), Minorities (4%) and weightage should be given to
candidates above 65 years. It has also been submitted that as per Section 34 of the Rights of
Persons with Disability Act, the reservation percentage has been enhanced from 3% to 4%
with regard to physically challenged persons and the same is required to be provided in the
existing Guidelines.
5.42. The Department has further submitted that the present system of selection is based on
awarding of marks for different areas of competence as the Interview Board awards marks to
the applicant by accessing their knowledge in certain areas, i.e. the Notaries Act, 1952 (20
marks), the Commercial Law/Negotiable Instruments Act,1881/Indian Stamp Act, 1899, etc.
(20 marks), the Constitution of India (20 marks), the Advocates Act, 1961 (10 marks), and
also field/area of practice at the Bar (20 marks) and age & length of practice at Bar (10
marks).
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
45
Time limit for issue of Certificates
5.43. The Department has informed that the Notaries Act, 1952 and the Notaries Rules,
1956 do not provide for any time limit to be adhered by the Department to issue Certificate of
Practice/Renewal of Certificate of Practice. However, fresh Certificates as well as renewed
Certificates of the Notaries are issued on priority basis. It has also been informed that the
Department is in the process of establishing an Electronic Service Division which is proposed
to cater to the requirement of providing online platform for various interaction with the public
and Departments. Once this facility becomes operational, the possibility for making notaries
appointments and renewal procedure on-line can be explored.
Vacancy position
5.44. The Department in its written replies to the questionnaire has provides State/UT-wise
Government Central quota of notaries along with number of notaries appointed and available
vacancies as under:
TABLE NO. - XVIII
Sl. No.
States Quota of Notaries
No. of Notaries appointed
Available vacancies
1 Andhra Pradesh 865 412 453
2 Assam 575 02 573
3 Bihar 925 61 864
4 Gujarat 1760 1678 82
5 Kerala 1000 635 365
6 Madhya Pradesh 1125 74 1051
7 Tamil Nadu 1360 886 474
8 Maharashtra 3700 2251 1449
9 Karnataka 1266 1126 140
10 Odisha 750 24 726
11 Punjab 1197 993 204
12 Rajasthan 1500 1204 296
13 Uttar Pradesh 2188 1840 348
14 West Bengal 450 176 274
15 Jammu & Kashmir 350 - 350
16 Nagaland 200 - 200
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
46
17 Haryana 1338 1099 239
18 Himachal Pradesh 300 04 446
19 Manipur 225 - 225
20 Tripura 100 12 88
21 Meghalaya 175 - 175
22 Sikkim 100 - 100
23 Mizoram 200 - 200
24 Arunachal Pradesh 325 - 325
25 Goa 63 14 49
26 Uttarakhand 325 35 290
27 Chhattisgarh 400 12 388
28 Jharkhand 450 14 436
29 Delhi 1000 540 460
30 Andaman & Nicobar 50 - 50
31 Lakshadweep 25 - 25
32 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 25 - 25
33 Daman & Diu 50 - 50
34 Pondicherry 100 96 4
35 Chandigarh 108 99 9
5.45. During the deposition before the Committee on 23rd February, 2018, the Secretary,
Department of Legal Affairs had informed that there are 13,500 notaries working throughout
India under the Central Government quota. It was also stated that the reason for the large
number of vacancies is that less number of applications are received from many places,
particularly North Eastern States. The Members had raised various queries on the issue of
existence of huge vacancies in the Notaries. In the written replies to the queries of Members,
the Department has informed that there is a sharp increase in fresh applications for
appointment as Notary Public from the States of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu,
Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Delhi. The Department
has constraints of space and staff strength, etc. and this comes in the way of smooth and
expeditious conduct of interviews at regular intervals. The Department has informed that it
takes almost 2-3 years’ time for selection after conducting interviews. However, the
Department has stated that it is trying its best to ensure that the appointment of Notaries
against the existing vacancies are finalised within the least possible time. It may also examine
the need for advertising the vacancies in order to expedite their filling up. It has also been
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
47
informed that a proposal for conducting interviews for appointment of Notaries for North
Eastern states, Odisha, West Bengal, Bihar Jharkhand and Rajasthan from 3rd April, 2018 to
20th April, 2018 has been approved by the Competent Authority.
5.46. The Committee is of the view that Notaries are an important link in the judicial
system and provide cost effective services to public for various basic services viz.,
verification, authentication, certification of documents etc. in the country. The
Committee is, therefore, despondent to note that nation-wide more than 5000 vacancies
of Notaries exist under the Central Government quota. The data shows that 11
States/UTs do not have a single notary appointed and in most other States/UTs also,
there are huge vacancies. However, the Government is not taking any proactive
measures to fill them. The vacancies are not even advertised and the interested
candidates need to apply suo motu for the notaryship. Further, the Committee also
observes that the entire process of appointment of Notaries from application stage to
issue of Certificate of Practice takes an inordinate time; from interview to selection
alone, this period is almost 2-3 years. This state of affairs is completely unacceptable
and the Department should take immediate action to remedy the problem, starting by
advertising all the vacancies. Further, a reasonable time frame should be decided to
complete the entire process of selection of notaries and issue of Certificate of Practice.
The renewal of Certificate of Practice should also be done in a time bound manner. Just
because the Notaries Act, 1952 and Notaries Rules, 1956 do not prescribe specific time
limit for the exercise, it does not mean that the Department can unduly delay the entire
process, thereby causing hardship to the common people. The Committee recommends
that the Department should take immediate measures, including the ones suggested
above, to fill the existing vacancies in the notaries in a timely manner. The Committee
would like to be apprised of the progress made in this regard in the Action Taken
Replies of the Department to this Report.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
48
CHAPTER - VI
DEMAND NO. 61: DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
6.0. The Budget of the Department, which was salary oriented (till 1992-93), now has the
provision of both Scheme and Non-Scheme Expenditures. The Department facilitates
administration of justice, ensures easy access and timely delivery of Justice to all, implements
the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms, monitors development of
judicial infrastructure through a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, facilitating ICT-enablement
and connectivity of courts, formulates and implements Policies for Judicial reforms,
facilitates the National Judicial Academy as a resource centre, etc. The Department of Justice
has sought allocation of 1240.83 crore in BE (2018-19), out of which 1127.00 crore is
on the Scheme side and 113.83 is for Non-Scheme expenditure. The detailed budgetary
provisions of the Department of Justice are given in Tables VIII & IX in Chapter II of the
Report.
SCHEMES OF THE DEPARTMENT AND BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS FOR
THEM
6.1. The Scheme allocation of 1127 crore is under the two scheme heads - Central
Sector Scheme of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms and Centrally
Sponsored Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for the Judiciary, including
Gram Nyayalayas.
Central Sector Scheme of National Mission for Justice Delivery
6.2. A total allocation of Rs 497 crore is proposed in BE 2018-19 for the Central Sector
Scheme of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms which includes
allocations for E-Courts Project Phase - II, Action Research and Studies on Judicial
Reforms,Access to Justice - Govt. of India (NE & JK).There is an increase of Rs 64.50 crore
and Rs 109.80 crore for the Central Sector Scheme over BE 2017-18 and RE 2017-18,
respectively, mainly due to increase in budgetary allocation under e-Court Phase-II from Rs
416 crore in BE 2017-18 to Rs 480 crore in BE 2018-19.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
49
(a) E-Courts Mission Mode Project (MMP)
6.3. The e-Courts Integrated Mission Mode Project (e-Courts IMMP) is one of the
National e-Governance Plan (NeGP) projects, being implemented for the Information &
Communication Technology (ICT) enablement and computerization of the District &
Subordinate courts in the country. Initiated in the year 2010, the Phase-I of e-Courts IMMP,
while accomplishing its set targets and timelines with a good success rate, concluded at a
total cost of Rs 639.144 crores. At the end of Phase-I in 2015, of the total target of 14,249
Districts and Subordinate courts were computerized and sites for all other courts have been
made ready for computerization. This has enabled the courts to upload the case status and
orders online. Status of cases and copies of judgments have also been made available on the
websites of the respective District and Subordinate Courts.
6.4. Out of financial outlay of ₹ 1,670 crores for the period 2015-19, a sum of ₹ 921.75
crores has so far been released by the Government under Phase II. During the current
financial year 2017-18, an amount of Rs 356.97 crore has been released to all High Courts
and National Informatics Centre as of January, 2018. Key features of the Project include
provisioning of basic infrastructure for Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
enablement of district and subordinate courts, which consists of various modules, primarily
such as computer hardware, Local Area Network (LAN), internet connectivity and
installation of standard application software at district and subordinate courts. As on date, the
Department of Justice has completed ICT enablement of 16,089 district and subordinate
courts across the country under the e-Courts project. Video conferencing facility has also
been operationalized between 488 court complexes and 342 corresponding prisons during the
period 2015-17. Judicial proceedings/ decisions of computerized district and subordinate
courts of the country are available on the e-Courts portal (http://www.ecourts.gov.in). e-
Courts services such as details of case registration, cause list, case status, daily orders, and
final judgments are made available to litigants and advocates through SMS (Push and Pull),
email, web, mobile application and Judicial Service Centers. The Department has submitted
that the evaluation of the e-Courts Project is in process. The Request for Proposal (RPF)
document is prepared and has been sent to e-Committee, Supreme Court of India for
comments.
6.5. The Department of Justice in its written replies to the Committee on the Demands for
Grants (2018-19) apprised of the achievements of the Project as under:-
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
50
� Computerisation of district and subordinate courts: Computerisation of 16,089
district and subordinate courts across the country under the eCourts project has been
completed, through provisioning of computer hardware, Local Area Network (LAN),
internet connectivity and installation of standard application software in district and
subordinate courts.
� National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG): Apart from providing online information such
as details of case registration, cause list, case status, daily orders, etc., the NJDG
portal provides information and access to judicial proceedings/ decisions of 16,089
computerized district and subordinate courts with respect of over 8.86 crore cases and
more than 5.24 crore orders / judgments pertaining to these courts. In its written
replies to the queries of the Members of the Committee, the Department has further
informed that NJDG is a grid of case databases of all court complexes. Besides, it
provides a variety of information to the litigants and judicial administration at various
levels for Case Management and Court Management. The Judicial administration of
High Courts and District Courts can make use of it for policy planning on cases and
Court management, equal and sufficient work to judicial officers, planning for more
courts, human resources, infrastructure, etc. It has features to evaluate judges’
performance.
� Video Conferencing between Court Complexes and Jails: The desktop based
Video Conferencing (VC) infrastructure was established at 488 court complexes and
342 jails in Phase I of the Project. The process establishing this facility at the
remaining 2768 Court Complexes and 958 Jails has been initiated. The VC facility
has been initialised for pilot use in routine remand of under-trial prisoners and for
recording evidence in some specific cases.
� Judicial Service Centres (JSC): Judicial Service Centres (JSC) have been
established at all computerized courts to serve as a single window for filing petitions
and applications by litigants/ lawyers, and for obtaining information on ongoing cases
and copies of orders and judgments etc.
� Mobile Application for E-Courts: E-Courts mobile app with the facility of QR Code
was launched on 22.07.2017. for use of litigants and lawyers. Services under different
captions viz. Search by CNR, Case Status, Cause List and My Cases are available on
this app. With its availability on both Google Play and Apple Store, the total number
of downloads have crossed over 4.43 lakhs.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
51
� SMS & e-Mail based Case Information Services: A new and more user friendly
version CIS 2.0 has been developed and deployed at all the computerized courts.
Furthermore, the facility of providing case information service(s) through SMS has
also been implemented. The case details can be obtained by sending unique CNR
(Case Number Record) number to 9766899899 through SMS. Cause lists,
judgements, case status etc. can be received in the litigants’ mailbox on registration of
email address.
� Process Re-Engineering: Process Reengineering exercises are underway to
modernize the existing processes and procedures to expedite disposal of cases. The
objective is to prepare simplified model rules and court procedures (Civil and
Criminal) for around 70-80 existing court processes and procedures that have already
been identified.
� Project Management: Acknowledging the need of international exposure, an
initiative under the project was taken to equip 28 Judicial Officers in-tune with global
best practices by organizing a two week Residential training program at University of
California, Berkeley. A week long executive program on Project Management for 36
Project Coordinators of various High Courts under the e-Courts Project was
conducted during October, 2017 at Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore.
� E-filing Application for High Courts and District Courts: An eFiling application
for High Courts and District Courts to enable the advocates, petitioners-in-person,
etc., to file their cases on-line (at any time) was launched in December 2017. The
advanced features of online payment and SMS & Email alerts are under the process
and are expected to be released shortly.
6.6. The Department in its written submissions has also informed that the targets and
financial estimates for Phase-II of e-Courts MMP for financial year 2018-19 are as under:
TABLE NO. - XIX
Targets and financial estimates for Phase II of eCourts MMP for FY 2018-19
Sl. No.
Component Amounts Justification
In Rs.Cr
1. Computerisation of courts (Procurement and installation of Hardware and LAN)
268.34 Computers and LAN installation in courts
2. Technical infrastructure for Court Complexes
148.35 For process servers, site preparation and kiosks.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
52
3. Cloud Connectivity 29.61 Out of total estimated amount of ₹ 73 crores allotted for cloud connectivity, an amount of Rs.43.4 cr has been released and the remaining amount is proposed to be released in the fourth year of the Project.
4. WAN Connectivity in all Court Complexes
209.18 Based on the bandwidth requirement of Courts assessed by a duly constituted technical committee, BSNL submitted a revised estimated amount of ₹ 194.29 cr out of which ₹ 22.13 cr has already been released to North Eastern States including Sikkim.
5. Solar Energy in 41 Court Complexes 6.59 41 Court Complexes are proposed to be equipped with solar energy equipment, at the cost of Rs.15 lakhs per court complexes
6. Software Development 33.98
For manpower at SDU, Pune, NIC headquarters and software development and technical support team for Central Project Coordinators (CPCs)
7. Change Management 13.21 For training of Judicial Officers, Court staff and other stake holders.
8. Judicial Process Reengineering 19.74 Judicial Process Reengineering is an ongoing exercise. The High Courts have submitted reports for processes to be reengineered.
9. Judicial Knowledge Management System (JKMS)
19.28 For implementation of various components of JKMS such as Integrated Library Management System and Analysis tools
TOTAL 748.28
6.7. 480 crore is allocated for E-Court Phase-II in BE 2018-19, which is an increase of
109.8 crore over RE (2017-18). The Department has informed that the reason for the
increased allocation is that all the components and activities not undertaken during the first
three years of the project, are proposed to be taken up in the fourth and final year of the
project, i.e. 2018-19.
6.8. The Department in its written submissions has stated that the utilization of funds
allocated during 2017-18 is only 7.51%. The Department in its reply to the questionnaire has
submitted that the funds were released to the High Courts only after May, 2017. High Courts
are in varying levels of progress in terms of expenditure and are in advanced stages of
procurement. The e-Committee, Supreme Court of India and the Department of Justice are
making efforts to understand the bottlenecks, facilitate solutions and increase utilization of
funds released to the High Courts, through video conferencing with State Governments and
High Courts.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
53
6.9. The Department has further informed that it has been allocated Rs 268 crore less than
its projection of 748.28 crore in BE (2018-19). The Department is of the view that this
would adversely affect the implementation of important components such as Wide Area
Network, Cloud connectivity and software development. The impact due to shortfall, is likely
to be on all other components, especially Technical infrastructure for Court Complexes,
Hardware and LAN procurement and installation. This will result in non-computerisation or
partial computerization of some of the courts which are laggards. It has also been submitted
that the component of digitization is given in the Action Plan Document but for District and
Taluka courts, funds were not allocated. E-Summons solution requires the summons to be
served along with copies of pleadings and documents. For aforementioned solution,
digitization is pre-requisite before uploading. Apart from this, there is agreat need for
digitization of records at District and Taluka Courts for seamless flow of documents from one
Court to another Court or Higher Court. Reduced allocation of funds would hamper
completion of above activities.
6.10. The e-Courts Mission Mode Project is being implemented to put in place a
justice delivery system with efficiency, accessibility, affordability and is also more
transparency. The Committee notes that there is a shortfall of 268 crore in BE 2018-
19 allocations for this Project. Inadequate funding would adversely affect the
implementation of important components of the Project, leading to delays in its
completion. The Committee, therefore, recommends that adequate funds may be
provided for the Project so that it is not stalled and accomplishes its set targets and
timelines. The Committee, further, recommends that periodic evaluation of the project
be carried out so as to make timely intervention, if any, needed for completion of the
project, as scheduled.
6.11. The Committee is apprised that the National Judicial Data Grid provides a
variety of information to the litigants and judicial administration at various levels for
Case Management and Court Management. The judicial administration of High Courts
and District Courts can make use of it for policy planning on cases and Court
management, equal and sufficient work to judicial officers, planning for more courts,
human resources, infrastructure, etc. It has features to evaluate judges’ performance.
The Committee feels that this could potentially be an important breakthrough for
judicial administration at various levels. The Committee suggests that the Department
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
54
should constitute a suitable body to analyse the data and put it to use so that the Grid
serves the purpose of unclogging the system.
(b) Scheme of Action Research and Studies on Judicial Reforms
6.12. A Plan Scheme for Action Research and Studies on Judicial Reforms was formulated
by the Department of Justice in September, 2013 with necessary approval of Standing
Finance Committee. The objective of the Scheme is to promote action research and studies in
the field of Judicial Reforms. The objective is wide enough to include each and every aspect
of legal and judicial matters of justice delivery in order to cover the broader object of the
National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms, viz. the objectives of increasing
access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancing accountability through
structural changes and by setting performance standards and improving capacities.
6.13. Under the scheme, financial assistance upto 25 lakh is provided to the eligible
implementing agencies for the projects/activities in the fields of Justice Delivery, Legal
Research and Judicial Reforms. In exceptional cases, where the scope of the Project is
sufficiently wide, sample size is large and Project is for longer duration, the Project
Sanctioning Committee (PSC) may relax this ceiling. The eligible implementing agencies are
Indian Institute of Public Administration, Administrative Staff College of India, Indian
Institutes of Management, Indian Law Institute, National Law Universities, National Council
of Applied Economic Research, National Judicial Academy, State Judicial Academies and
other reputed institution working in the field of justice delivery, Legal research and judicial
reforms.So far, 24 projects have been approved by the Project Sanctioning Committee and
2.33 crore has been released to such research institutes; final Reports have been received in
ten projects.
6.14. An amount of Rs 2 crore has been sought for the scheme in BE 2018-19, which is
the same as BE 2017-18 and an increase of 0.74 crore over RE (2017-18).Up to 21.02.2018,
1.06 crore has been utilized, which is 84.1% of RE 2017-18.
(c) Access to Justice in North Eastern States and Jammu and Kashmir
(A2JNE&JK) project
6.15. The Department of Justice has implemented a project on “Access to Justice in North
Eastern States and Jammu and Kashmir” under the Twelfth Five Year Plan. It’s being
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
55
implemented in the eight states of North East (including Sikkim) and in Jammu & Kashmir at
the total cost of 30 crore for five years from 2012-2017. Moreover, the project received
extension for three years from 1st April, 2017 to 31st March, 2020, and the budget for the new
phase is 46 crore. The objectives of the project are as follow:
• To address the legal needs of the marginalized and vulnerable sections of the
society, particularly women, children, Scheduled Castes, Tribal communities
who do not have the requisite means to ensure that their rights are guaranteed.
• To support justice delivery systems in improving their capacities to serve the
people and in empowering the ordinary people to demand improved services and
to access their rights and entitlements.
• To support innovative activities to enhance legal awareness of the vulnerable
populations and their ability to seek redress.
• To support Legal Services Authorities in providing legal aid and legal
empowerment of the marginalized in the nine project states.
• The project is being steered in the 9 States including Arunachal Pradesh, Assam,
Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura and Jammu &
Kashmir.
6.16 The work of third party evaluation was carried out by National Productivity Council.
The institute evaluated the physical and financial progress/performance of the Scheme during
the twelfth Five year Plan. It was successfully completed and it was recommended to
continue A2J NEJK Scheme to benefit far flung areas of North Eastern States and Jammu &
Kashmir.
6.17. 15 crore has been sought for the scheme in BE 2018-19, which an increase of Rs
7.5 crore and 11.06 crore over BE 2017-18 and RE 2017-18, respectively. Up to 21st
February, 2018, 3.94 crore has been utilized, which is 100% of RE 2017-18. The
Department has informed that the project is doing well in raising awareness of people in the
North Eastern areas. Legal aid clinics have been opened in various States and also legal
literacy programmes have been planned for deeper legal empowerment. The project has
gained momentum with the present activities and the increased budget has been allocated to
maintain the momentum.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
56
6.18. The Department has also informed that the amount allocated in BE 2018-19 is Rs 3.5
crore less than the projection of 18.5 crore made to the Ministry of Finance. The increased
allocation was sought for New Legal Aids Clinics and Legal Awareness activities. The
reduced allocations will lead to reduction of number of legal aid clinics, capacity building
workshops and production and dissemination of Information, Education & Communication
materials.
TABLE NO. - XX
The trend of utilization of funds for the Scheme
(Rs. in crore)
FY B.E R.E Expenditure Utilization
(in %)
2015-16 7.00 6.43 3.29 47.00
2016-17 7.00 7.00 5.82 83.14
2017-18 7.5 3.94 2.43** 61.00
6.19. The Department has submitted that the first phase (2012-17) of the project was
completed on 31st March, 2017. So the activities got completed and there was no expenditure.
New proposals could not be taken up until the project extension was approved by Secretary
(J) which was received on 17th November, 2017.
6.20. The Committee observes that though the allocation for the Project in BE 2018-19
has been doubled from that in BE 2017-18; however, there is still a shortfall of Rs 3.5
crore from the projected amount. The reduced allocation may impact the activities
proposed in the project in FY 2018-19, which centre around developing capacities of
marginalized people to secure justice and supporting justice delivery organisations in
serving people better. The Committee, therefore, recommends that adequate funds
should be made available at RE stage for the Project in FY 2018-19 so that the activities
proposed under the Project are not hampered.
Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for the Judiciary, including establishment of Gram Nyayalayas
6.21 The primary responsibility for development of judicial infrastructure in the State rests
with the State Governments. The Central Government augments the resources of the State
Governments by providing financial assistance under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS)
for development of infrastructure facilities for Judiciary. The scheme has been in place since
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
57
1993-94, and was revised in the year 2011. It covers the construction of court buildings and
residential accommodations of judicial officers of District and Subordinate Judiciary. It is
included as one of the Core Scheme in the National Development Agenda for realizing
‘VISION 2022’.
6.22 Funding Pattern: Until 2011, the Central and State Governments used to contribute
an equal share under the scheme, but from 2011-12 onwards the fund-sharing pattern was
revised with the Central Government contributing 75% of the funds. In case of States in the
North-East, the Central Government provides 90% of the funding. The fund sharing pattern
of the Scheme has been further revised from 75:25 to 60:40 (Centre: State) (90:10 for the 8
North-Eastern and 3 Himalayan States) with effect from 2015-16 on account of enhanced
devolution of funds to the State Governments based on the recommendations of 14th Finance
Commission. Central funding is, however, subject to budgetary allocation for the Scheme.
6.23 Budgetary Support: Since inception of the Scheme, the Central Government has
provided financial assistance amounting to 6009 crore to State Governments/Union
Territories. Out of this, an amount of 2565 crore has been provided since 2014-15 till 22nd
January, 2018 (46.66 percent).The trends of utilisation of funds both in monetary and
percentage terms under the Scheme during 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 (upto 31.01.2018)
are given in the following table.
TABLE NO. –XXI (Rs. in crore)
Financial Year Budget Estimates
Revised Estimates
Utilisation of funds
2015-16 562.99 562.99 562.99 (100%)
2016-17 600.00 538.74 538.74 (100%)
2017-18* 621.20 621.21 541.20 (87.12%)
*Utilisation of funds is up to 19.02.2018.
6.24. As on 5th February, 2018, the Central Government has released an amount of
2575.93 crore to the State Governments and UT administrations for the period from 2014-15
to 2017-18. During the current financial year (2017-18), an amount of Rs.541.20 crore has
been released to the States as of January, 2018. A Statement indicating funds released to
various States / UTs under the revised scheme from 2014-15 to 2017-18 is given below:
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
58
TABLE NO. – XXII
Statement indicating funds released to various States / UTs under the revised scheme (2014-15 to 2017-18)
(Rs in lakhs)
Sl. No.
State Funds sanctioned in 2014-15
Funds sanctioned in
2015-16
Funds sanctioned in 2016-17
Funds sanctioned in
2017-18
1 Andhra Pradesh
2 Bihar 4909.35 5000.00 4290.00
3 Chhattisgarh 2176.60
4 Goa
5 Gujarat 10000.00 5000.00 5000.00 5000.00
6 Haryana 5000.00 1500.00
7 Himachal Pradesh 819.00
8 Jammu & Kashmir 3429.00 1325.00 2104.00 1000.00
9 Jharkhand 3044.00 3044.00 5000.00
10 Karnataka 16370.00 5000.00 5000.00 5000.00
11 Kerala 2500.00
12 Madhya Pradesh 6141.00 5000.00 5000.00
13 Maharashtra 9975.00 5000.00 4975.00 5000.00
14 Orissa
15 Punjab 9805.00 5000.00 4800.00 5000.00
16 Rajasthan 5000.00 4374.00
17 Tamil Nadu 5000.00
18 Uttarakhand 3559.05 1038.00
19 UttarPradesh 12531.00 5000.00 5000.00 7500.00
20 West Bengal 2000.00
Total (A) 83940.00 44369.00 42072.00 47828.00
NE States
1 Arunachal Pradesh 1000.00 1593.00
2 Assam 2000.00
3 Manipur 2000.00 2000.00
4 Meghalaya 1709.00 2037.00 2000.00 292.00
5 Mizoram 1085.00 2000.00
6 Nagaland 2016.00 2000.00 2000.00
7 Sikkim
8 Tripura 1550.00
Total (B) 9360.00 5630.00 4000.00 6292.00 UTs
1 A & N Islands 259.68
2 Chandigarh
3 Dadra &Nagar Haveili
4 Daman & Diu 42.43
5 Delhi 6,040.32 5,000.00
6 Lakshadweep
7 Pondicherry 259.68 2500.00
Total (C) 0.00 6300.00 7802.11 0.00
Grand Total (A+B+C) 93300.00 56299.00 53874.11 54120.00
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
59
6.25. Status of Progress: There are 17,817 court halls / court rooms available for District
and Subordinate Courts in the country. In addition, 3165 court halls / court rooms are under
construction. Comparing these figures with the working strength of 16,754 judges / judicial
officers reported by High Courts, adequate court rooms / court halls are available for the
current strength of judicial manpower. Focus is now to match the availability of court rooms /
court halls with the sanctioned strength of judicial officers / judges in District and
Subordinate Courts. Considerable progress has also been made with regard to availability of
residential units for judicial officers in District and Subordinate Courts. There are 13,790
residential units were available for Subordinate Courts and 1778 residential units were under
construction.
6.26 Continuation of Scheme: The Expenditure Finance Committee (EFC) approved the
continuation of Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure
Facilities for Judiciary in August, 2017beyond 12th Five year Plan, i.e.from 31stMarch, 2017
upto 31stMarch, 2020, with an outlay of ₹ 3,320 crore for three years (Rs 1000 crore for
2017-18, Rs 1110 crore for 2018-19 and Rs 1210 for 2019-2020) for the Scheme to be
implemented in Mission Mode through the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal
Reforms.. The Union Cabinet approved the above recommendation of EFC in its meeting
held on 16th November, 2017. The Union Cabinet also approved that 1000 court halls and 600
residential units would be constructed during each year 2017-18 and 2018-19. The Union
Cabinet has also directed that the norms and specifications for infrastructure of court halls
and residential units should be formulated and an online monitoring system with geo-tagging
be also set up for effective monitoring of the works being undertaken under this scheme.
6.27 Evaluation of the Scheme: The Department in its written replies to the questionnaire
has informed that the implementation of the Scheme has been evaluated by a third party,
National Productivity Council, in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee in
its Ninety-fourth Report. It has concluded as under:
• The CSS has immensely contributed towards improving judicial infrastructure;
• It has helped in improving the quality of overall justice delivery system at the
subordinate courts in the country; and
• It has also been instrumental in reducing the pendency of cases and for the
partial establishment of the elements of model courts and e-Courts at the District
level.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
60
6.28. Allocation of funds in BE 2018-19: The Department in its written submission to the
Committee has stated that as per the recommendation of the EFC and subsequent approval of
the Union Government, at least Rs 1000 crore for 2017-18, Rs 1110 crore for 2018-19 and Rs
1210 for 2019-2020 would have been required to achieve the measurable target of 1000 court
halls and 600 residential units per year for the Scheme. In BE 2017-18, Rs 629.20 crore was
allocated, which has already been fully utilized. No additional allocation of fund was made in
RE 2017-18 andin BE (2018-19) too, against the projected demand of Rs 1110 crore, only Rs
630 crore has been allocated, which is a shortfall ofRs 480 crore (43.25%) from the outlay of
₹ 1,110 crore recommended by the EFC and approved by the Union Cabinet. Owing to the
reduced allocation, the development of judicial infrastructure in the States/UTs will be
adversely affected and the measurable targets for each year will not be achieved. Further,
failure to achieve the measurable targets due to non-availability of funds, may result in delay
in development of judicial infrastructure and thereby in expeditious delivery of justice to the
common man and also in reduction of pendency of cases in courts.
6.29. The Committee appreciates the activities under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme
for Infrastructure Development for Subordinate Judiciary and is of the view that
infrastructure development of courts is critical for timely delivery of justice. The
Committee observes that for achieving the measurable targets of construction of 1000
court halls and 600 residential units per year, the Government has approved an outlay
of ₹ 3,320 crore for three years (Rs 1000 crore for 2017-18, Rs 1110 crore for 2018-19
and Rs 1210 for 2019-2020). However, so far reduced allocations have been made for the
Scheme. In 2017-18, there was a shortfall of around Rs 370 crore and in BE 2018-19, it
is Rs 480.80 crore. The Committee feels that such a huge reduction in allocation for this
Scheme would make it impossible to achieve the measurable targets, which would
ultimately affect the justice delivery system. The Committee, accordingly, recommends
that the allocation under the CSS may be suitably enhanced at the RE Stage so that the
activities under the scheme do not suffer.
Gram Nyayalayas
6.30. The Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 came into force w.e.f. 2nd October, 2009. The Act
provides for establishment of Gram Nyayalayas at the grass root level with a view to
providing access to justice to citizens at their doorsteps. To encourage the States, the Central
Government formulated a scheme for providing financial assistance for non-recurring
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
61
expenses for setting up of Gram Nyayalayas @ 18.00 lakh per Gram Nyayalaya ( 10 lakh
for office building, 5.00 lakh for vehicle and 3.00 lakh for furnishing the office). In
addition, a provision was made in the scheme for recurring assistance for 50 percent of
expenditure up to a ceiling of 3.20 lakh per annum per Nyayalaya for the first three years.
The recurring and non-recurring assistance is subject to financial ceilings as provided in the
guidelines of the scheme.Rs. 52.60 crore has been released so far, including ₹ 8.00 crore
during current Financial Year (2017-18) under Gram Nyayalayas Scheme.
6.31. The Department in its written submission to the Committee during the Demands for
Grants (2018-19) submitted that out of 630 crore allocated under Centrally Sponsored
Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary, 8.00 crore is allocated in
BE (2018-19)for the Scheme of Assistance to State Governments for establishing and
operating Gram Nyayalayas, which is same as in the BE (2017-18).
6.32. So far, 11 States have notified 343 Gram Nyayalayas. Of them, 210have started
functioning in 9 States, as per the details given below:
TABLE NO. – XXIII
Sl. No. State Gram Nyayalayas Notified
Gram Nyayalayas Functional
1. Madhya Pradesh 89 89
2. Rajasthan 45 45
3. Karnataka 2 0
4. Odisha 22 14
5. Maharashtra 39 24
6. Jharkhand 6 1
7. Goa 2 0
8. Punjab 2 1
9. Haryana 2 2
10. Uttar Pradesh 104 4
11. Kerala 30 30
Total 343 210
6.33. The Department of Justice in its written reply to the Committee on the Demands for
Grants (2018-19) submitted that it has been reported by the State of Maharashtra that 12,413
cases have been disposed in Gram Nyayalayas, while Kerala has reported that 25,018 cases
have been disposed in Gram Nyayalayas. An Evaluation Study of the Scheme was carried out
in 2017 by the National Productivity Council. Considering the effectiveness and need for
Justice Delivery through Gram Nyayalayas, it has been recommended for continuation of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
62
Scheme with detailed operational guidelines, enhanced central assistance and improved
monitoring mechanisms. The details of institution, disposal and pendency of cases in Gram
Nyayalayas are not maintained centrally.
6.34. The Department has submitted that the issues affecting operationalization of the Gram
Nyayalayas were discussed in the Conference of Chief Justices of High Courts and Chief
Ministers of the States on 7th April, 2013. It was decided in the Conference that the State
Governments and High Courts should decide the question of establishment of Gram
Nyayalayas wherever feasible, taking into account the local issues and situation. The Central
Government has been making regular requests to the Chief Ministers of States and Chief
Justices of High Courts for establishment of Gram Nyayalayas in the respective States.
Recently, the Central Government has requested all State Governments, to set up Gram
Nyayalayas and seek financial assistance for operationalising them under the Gram
Nyayalayas Scheme.
6.35. In the ATR to the Ninety-first Report of the Committee, the Department had informed
that the difficulties faced by States in setting up of Gram Nyayalayas were discussed in the
meeting of the Law/Home Secretaries and Registrar Generals of the High Courts held on 19 -
20 April, 2012. One of the main reasons for the slow pace has been the request by the States
for more financial assistance. Besides, response of the Bar, reluctance of police officials and
other State functionaries to invoke jurisdiction of Gram Nyayalayas, non-availability of
notaries and stamp vendors and more importantly, problem of concurrent jurisdiction of
regular courts, are other issues highlighted by the States which are coming in the way of
speedy operationalization of the scheme. It was also informed that in the year 2011, the
Indian Law Institute conducted a study on the effectiveness of functioning of Gram
Nyayalayas in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. The study concluded that Gram Nyayalayas in
these states have not achieved the objectives of either speedy disposal or inexpensive justice
for the poor. However, despite initial problems, institution of Gram Nyayalayas would
succeed if concrete, well planned and continuous efforts are made.
6.36. The pace of establishment of Gram Nyayalayas has been very slow; only 343
Gram Nyayalayas have been notified by 11 States so far and out of these only 210 are
functional in 9 States. The Committee has been expressing concern regarding this state
of affairs for a long time. The Committee has been of the view that delegation of
responsibility to establish Gram Nyayalayas to High Courts and State Governments in
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
63
Conference of Chief Justices of High Courts and Chief Ministers of the States since 2013
has not seen any heartening improvement. Therefore, in its Ninety-fourth, the
Committee had suggested that the Department should explore a tri-partite model so
that expertise of the Department could also be utilized in establishing Gram
Nyayalayas. The Committee also notes that the Evaluation agency of the Scheme,
National Productivity Council, has recommended for continuation of the Scheme with
detailed operational guidelines, enhanced central assistance and improved monitoring
mechanisms.
6.37. The Committee feels that though the institution of Gram Nyayalayas have not
achieved the objectives of either speedy disposal or inexpensive justice for the poor so
far but can still succeed if concrete, well planned and continuous efforts are made. The
Committee, therefore, suggests that the recommendations of the National Productivity
Council for preparation of detailed operational guidelines, enhanced central assistance
and improved monitoring mechanisms should be implemented immediately. The
Committee also reiterates its recommendation that the Department should explore a tri-
partite model so that expertise of the Department could also be utilized in establishing
Gram Nyayalayas.
New Initiatives
6.38. The Department has informed that it has launched the following new initiatives on
20th April, 2017, with a focus to improve access to justice:
(a) Nyaya Mitra Programme
6.39. The Department of Justice, in association with CSC e-governance Services India
Limited, New Delhi, has launched ‘Nyaya Mitra scheme’ The program aims at providing
legal aid to the marginalized communities in select 227 districts of 16 States, including Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Odisha, NER States and
Jammu & Kashmir, where maximum cases are pending for over ten years as well as work
closely with district judiciary to reduce pendency of cases. Retired government officers and
retired judicial officers are functioning as Nyaya Mitras in 15 districts as on date.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
64
(b) Tele law Scheme
6.40. The Scheme is being collaboratively implemented by the Department of Justice, CSC
e-Governance Services Pvt. Ltd and State Legal Service Authority under the aegis of
National Legal Service Authority (NALSA).
6.41. The scheme aims to provide legal aid and advice to the marginalized communities by
the panel lawyers stationed at the State Legal Service Authority, through Para Legal
Volunteers (PLVs). Communication between the panel lawyers and the beneficiary is done
through video conferencing, chat and telephone available at the Common Service Centers
established at the Panchayat level. 1000 Common Services Centers in UP and Bihar were
identified by the CSC e-governance Services India Limited, New Delhi for the program to be
started. A web portal on tele law was designed to register grievances/ legal issues of the
applicants and enable video conferencing with an advocate. Para Legal Volunteers were also
engaged through NALSA to mainly to facilitate outreach, case identification, legal advice and
post advice assistance to the beneficiaries. Panel Lawyers of Legal Services Authority have
been engaged to provide legal advice. Currently, 750 PLVs and VLEs have been trained in
four batches in UP and 261 (one batch) in Bihar. Panel Lawyers have also been provided
training by CSC e-gov and DoJ. As on date, 11000 cases have been registered on the Tele
Law Portal and advice has been rendered in around 8000 cases.
(c) Pro Bono Legal Service Scheme
6.42. Pro Bono legal service initiative aims to consolidate advocates to provide pro bono
legal services to marginalised individuals and to institutionalize pro bono culture in India. To
this end, Department of Justice has created a web based platform (available at doj.gov.in),
through which interested lawyers can register themselves to volunteer pro bono services for
the under-privileged litigants, and marginalized individuals can apply for legal aid and advice
from the pro bono lawyers.
6.43. As on 21 December 2017, 193 advocates from across the country have registered for
volunteering pro bono services; 298 cases of the marginalized applicants have been assigned
to these advocates including those (184 cases) which have been referred to Supreme Court
Legal Services Committee; 69 advocates have provided feedback reports.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
65
6.44. The Department is developing a mobile application which will facilitate connections
between beneficiaries and pro bono lawyers. The main objective of the App is to ensure the
scheme’s wider reach, given the high internet mobile penetration in India.
6.45. The Committee appreciates the new initiatives of Nyaya Mitra Programme, Tele
Law Project and Pro Bono Legal Service Scheme launched by the Government to
improve access to justice and feels that all the three schemes are conceptually strong. As
these initiatives are presently at a nascent stage, their true potential would only be
known in the coming times. However, the Committee recommends that the Government
should take all necessary steps, including providing adequate financial backing, to make
these schemes successful on the ground level.
NON- SCHEME ALLOCATIONS
6.46. The major components of Non-Scheme allocation are Secretariat Expenditure of
Department of Justice, Secretariat expenditure of National Mission for Justice Delivery and
Legal Reforms, Grants-in-aid to the National judicial Academy (NJA), Secretariat General
Services expenditure and Grants-in-aid to the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA),
and Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.
Variation of Non-Scheme allocations over the financial year 2017-18
6.47. There is a decrease of Rs 25.57 crore and Rs 26.20 crore in BE 2018-19 over BE
2017-18 and RE 2017-18, respectively. The Department has submitted the reasons for
variation between RE 2017-18 and BE 2018-19 as under:
• Allocation of 5.2 crore is proposed for Secretariat General Services expenditure
of NALSA, which is a decrease of 2.2 crore over RE 2017-18. NALSA had
projected a requirement of Rs 9.17 crore for the year 2018-19 under various heads
of Administrative expenses. However, based on the trend of expenditure, the same
has been reduced to Rs 5.2 crore in BE 2018-19. NALSA may submit its revised
estimates at later stage after taking into account the trend of expenditure under
various sub-heads.
• Grants-in-aid of Rs 80 crore are proposed for NALSA, which is a decrease of Rs
20 crore over RE 2017-18. The variation is due to reduced allocation by IFD.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
66
• Grants-in-aid of Rs11.15 crore are proposed for NJA, which is a decrease of Rs
4.85 crore over RE 2017-18. The Grant-in-aid (General) has remained the same in
RE 2017-18 and BE 2018-19, i.e. Rs 10 crore but against Grant for creation of
capital asset of Rs 6 crore in RE 2017-18, only Rs 1.15 crore is proposed in BE
2018-19 because construction of 20 residential flats for the staff of NJA, Bhopal is
on the verge of completion. The reduced amount is required for allied works,
which are minor in nature.
• No allocation for Family Courts has been made in BE (2018-19) as against 0.01
crore BE (2017-18). It was decided by the Government that with effect from
2016-17, no provision may be kept for recurring expenses of Family Courts as the
14th Finance Commission had urged the State Governments to implement the
recommendations relating to the justice sector through their own funds based on
additional tax devolution to them, which included setting up of Family Courts
where none exist today. It was also decided that the funds required for capital
expenditure on construction of court halls for Family Courts may continue to be
processed through the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Development of
Infrastructure for Subordinate Judiciary.
National Judicial Academy (NJA)
6.48. The National Judicial Academy (NJA), Bhopal was established in 1993 under the
Societies Registration Act, 1860 and works under the directions of the Supreme Court of
India. The mandate of NJA is to organize training programmes approved by the National
Judicial Academic Council (NJAC) for the Judicial Officers of the entire country. The
Academy also imparts training to judicial officers of the other countries as and when
approached. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India is the Chairman of the General Body of NJA
as well as the Chairman of the Governing Council, the Executive Committee and the
Academic Council of NJA.
6.49. The Registrar, NJA while deposing before the Committee on the Demands for Grants
(2018-19) submitted that the Academy is fully funded by the Government of India by way of
provision of Grants-in-aid (general) and grants-in-aid for creation of capital assets. In BE
(2018-19), Rs 11.15 crore is allocated to NJA. The following table provides the details of
grants-in-aid sanctioned to NJA from 2015-16 to 2018-19.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
67
TABLE NO. – XXIV
Grants-in-aid General (Revenue) (Rs. in crore)
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
BE RE Actual BE RE Actual BE Released BE
10.74 10.74 12.69* 10.74 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Grants for Creation of Capital Assets
BE RE Actual BE RE Actual BE Released BE
0 0 0 10.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 4.9395 1.15
*The excess expenditure was made from the savings of the Academy which had been recouped from the previous year's allocations, as informed by the Chief Accounts Officer of the Academy.
6.50. The Registrar, National Judicial Academy while deposing before the Committee on
the Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that the Academy has a total sanctioned
strength of 124 posts, including 1 each of post of Director and Additional Director, 2 posts of
Registrar, 21 posts of academic staff and 99 posts of non-academic staff. Out of these, 1 post
of Registrar, 6 posts of academic staff and 25 posts of non-academic staff are lying vacant.
6.51. It was also informed that the Academy conducts various training
programmes/refresher course/conference for High Court Judges, CBI Officers, Special Courts
and for officers from SAARC countries.
6.52. During the deposition of Registrar, NJA, the Chairman of the Committee had sought
information regarding how many employees of the Academy belong to SC, ST and OBC
community. NJA in its written submissions has informed that of the 96 staff members
(excluding the Director, Additional Director and Registrar), 8 belong to SC category, 2 to ST,
35 to OBC and 51 belong to General category. Further, of the total 99 employees, 14 are
female.
6.53. The Committee observes that the Academy has been in existence for more than
two decades now and substantial amount of public fund has already been spent on it. It
would, therefore, be useful for the Department to get a third party evaluation made of
the quality of training being imparted at the Academy and the extent to which training
at the Academy has resulted in strengthening the judicial system, so that shortcomings,
if any, could be removed.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
68
National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)
6.54. The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) has been constituted under the
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to monitor and evaluate implementation of legal aid
programmes and to lay down policies and principles for making legal services available
under the Act. In every State, a State Legal Services Authority (SLSAs) and in every High
Court, a High Court Legal Services Committee has been constituted. District Legal Services
Authorities (DLSAs), Taluk Legal Services Committees have been constituted in the Districts
and most of the Taluks to give effect to the policies and directions of the NALSA and to
provide free legal services to the people and conduct Lok Adalats in the State. Supreme Court
Legal Services Committee has been constituted to administer and implement the legal
services programme insofar as it relates to the Supreme Court of India.
Functioning of NALSA
6.55. The Member-Secretary, NALSA during his deposition in the Committee informed
that to achieve the objective of Access to Justice for All, the State Legal Services Authorities,
District Legal Services Authorities, Taluk Legal Services Committees, etc. are doing the
following activities: (i) Providing Free and Competent Legal Services to the eligible persons
as per the criteria given under Section 12 of the Act; (ii) Spreading Legal Literacy and
awareness; (iii) Promoting ADR mechanisms (Lok adalats) for amicable settlement of
disputes; (iv) Implementing victims compensation scheme; and (v) Organising preventive and
strategic intervention programmes. NALSA has 36 SLSAs, 640 DLSAs, 20134 Legal
Services Clinics in villages, jails, communities, etc., about 15000 Legal Literacy Clubs in
schools and colleges, more than 60,000 empanelled Legal Services Advocates and 65,000
trained Para Legal Volunteers (PLVs) to reach the grassroots level. The PLVs mainly act as
bridge between the community members and legal services institutions.
6.56. The Department of Justice in their written submissions has also been informed that
from 2014-15 to 2017-18 (till Sept. 2017), 17.46 lakh persons have been benefited through
legal aid services in the country, as per the following details:
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
69
TABLE NO. – XXV
Statement Showing the Number of Persons who Benefitted through Legal Services and Advice from 2014-15 to 2017-18
Sl.
No.
Year SC ST BC Women Children In
custody
General Total
1 2014-15 27,443 22,995 62,075 56,500 9,019 56,904 3,26,609 5,61,545
2 2015-16 25,439 23,558 61,503 72,363 7,963 65,093 55,751 3,11,670
3 2016-17 43,806 34,065 1,06,995 1,21,050 19,230 1,12,948 1,11,398 5,56,689
4 2017-18 (till
Sept. 2017)
23,276 20,385 49,503 77,233 9,980 72,048 54,674 3,15,890
Lok Adalats
6.57. As per the written submissions of the Department and the information in the Annual
Report of the Ministry 2017-18, Lok Adalat is one of the Alternative Disputes Resolution
Mechanisms. It is a forum where the disputes/cases pending in the court of law or at pre-
litigation stage are settled amicably. The Lok Adalat has been given statutory status under the
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Lok Adalats are being organized by the Legal Services
Authorities on regular basis for settlement of cases pending before courts u/s 19 of the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987 and also for matters at pre-litigative stage, under the guidance
of NALSA. National Lok Adalat is also conducted for settlement of cases in all the courts
from the Supreme Court to the Taluk Courts. Permanent Lok Adalats have also been set up in
most of the States to take up and settle disputes relating to public utility services. From 2014-
15 to 2017-18 (till December, 2017), a total number of 524000 Lok Adalats have been
organized in the country and about 454.87 lakh cases were settled in these Lok Adalats. In
addition, 11571 sittings of permanent Lok Adalats were held from April to September, 2017
and 60,043 cases were settled and total value settlement comes to Rs 105.8 crore. Further,
since January, 2017, NALSA has organised five National Lok Adalats throughout the country
in all courts at all levels from the Taluk Courts to High Courts.
TABLE NO. - XXVI
Disposal of cases in National Lok Adalat (in lakhs)
Date Pending
Cases
Pre-
Litigation
Total
11.02.17 6.57 3.02 9.53
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
70
08.04.17 4.13 5.32 9.45
08.07.17 5.50 4.68 10.18
09.09.17 6.02 5.15 11.18
09.12.2017 6.59 7.11 13.70
Legal Awareness Programmes
6.58. The Department has also informed that as a part of the preventive and strategic legal
aid, NALSA through the State Legal Services Authorities, conducts legal literacy
programmes. In some States, Legal Literacy Programmes are conducted every year in schools
and colleges, and also for empowerment of women in a routine manner, besides the rural
legal literacy camps. NALSA undertook special legal awareness programmes on
MGNREGA, Rights of Senior Citizens and Women’s Welfare Programmes. A special
scheme for settlement of grievances relating to MGNREGA through Lok Adalat also was
implemented by NALSA.
6.59. The Member-Secretary, NALSA in his deposition before the Committee informed of
the steps taken by NALSA during the last couple of years and in the current financial year to
reach out to more and more people, increase the quality of court-based legal services and
initiatives for the under trial prisoners and convicts in jails. The Chairman of the Committee
pointed out that the problem even in the Supreme Court is that a lawyer appearing on behalf
of the Legal Service Authority finds that sometimes translation is not complete. In the
absence of translated documents, other proper documents and instructions, it is very difficult
for lawyers. Members also pointed out the issue of overcrowding of jails, where two-thirds
are under trial prisoners, who are presumably innocent according to law. There is no respect
for human dignity and human rights of the inmates. Members also shared experiences that on
the ground level a man in distress, whose liberty is taken away, Article 21 is suspended for
the time being, does not get legal aid at the stage of first remand, as claimed by NALSA.
They are paraded like cattle and there is nobody to stand up and say that I have a brief and
this man has been arrested wrongly. The legal aid lawyers surface only when the evidence is
being recorded and by that time it is too late. By that time, all fabrication and everything is
done by the policemen. Therefore, he cannot be guarded. It was also pointed out by the
Members that in most cases raw lawyers, who do not know what is the particular complicity
of the crime or involvement of the client, are assigned.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
71
6.60. In this regard the Committee took note of the Report of the Bihar State Legal Services
Authority on ‘Prisons of Bihar’ published in the year 2015 which inter-alia mentioned that
out of 1,083 woman prisoners who were approached hardly any of them could name their
lawyer. Nor were they aware of the stage of the case or the sections under which they were
framed. Most of them told that their “guardians” know best about their cases. Women
prisoners were heavily dependent on their families or on well-wishers in making crucial
decisions. The guardians in most instances were the male members of the family. Women
prisoners hesitated to ask for legal aid lawyers even if their families have not visited them in
months. For them, it was an endless wait.
6. 61. The Report stated further that out of 3,070 persons, 2,218 persons were not produced
before the Judge as the first production. The Chairman observed that technology alone cannot
assure protection of legal rights of prisoners. Work needs to be done at the ground level.
Members also sought to know the initiatives being taken by NALSA to provide legal
representation to all the undertrials from the very beginning, to decongest the jails, and to
appoint competent lawyers, etc.
6.62. The Department of Justice has furnished while replying to the replies to the queries of
the Members stated that NALSA is taking the following initiatives for Undertrial prisoners
and Convicts in jails:
• In the last two years NALSA has established Legal Services Clinics in about 1070
jails, manned by trained Para Legal Volunteers (PLVs) and Panel Lawyers and jail
inmates trained as PLVs to provide legal advice and assistance to inmates in the jail
itself. NALSA panel lawyers and PLVs are available on call at all the Police stations
pan India. 1.10 lakh prison inmates, including undertrial prisoners and convicts, have
availed legal services from NALSA. It was also informed that NALSA has dedicated
Remand Advocates in all the Magisterial Courts to provide legal service right from
the first remand. A total of 9563 Remand Advocates have been appointed for this
purpose.
• NALSA has been appointed as Nodal Agency by two benches of Hon’ble Supreme
Court for providing a complete digital solution to legal services needs for undertrial
prisoners but also convicts with the help of Crime and Criminal Tracking Network
System (CCTNS), E-prison portal, Case Information System (CIS) under e-
Committee and Inter Operable Criminal Justice System (ICJS).
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
72
• It is digitizing 700 of its Legal Services Clinics in jails with an aim to seamlessly
access case information and documents of undertrial prisoners and convicts from
ICJS. Availability of handy and updated trial documents in jails would go a long way
in providing effective legal services to undertrial prisoners and timely filing of appeal
of convicts.
• Under Trial Review Committees (UTRCs) are functioning in all the Districts under
the Chairpersonship of the concerned District and Sessions Judge, who is also
Chairperson of the DLSA, to recommend the cases of prisoners who are entitled to
bail under Section 436(A) of Cr. P.C. and also various other categories as mandated
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Writ Petion Civil No. 406/2013.
DLSA Secretaries are working closely with UTRCs for release of undertrial prisoners
who are entitled to statutory bails. 2081 such undertrial prisoners were released in the
year 2017.
• NALSA is in the process of finalizing the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for
UTRCs and other stakeholders for smooth identification, recommendation follow up
and reporting of all categories of prisoners so released. NALSA is also planning to
evolve a complete digital solution for easy identification of such cases in coordination
with ICJS, CCTNS and Nation e-Prison Portal. NALSA intends to use Artificial
Intelligence to scan through data of 4 lakh prison inmates on daily basis to check if
they are entitled to technical bail as per Law and also keep check if undertrial prisoner
are languishing in jail for failure of furnishing jail bonds.
6.64. During the deposition of the Member-Secretary, NALSA, the Members of the
Committee had enquired as to how NALSA intends to utilize Artificial Intelligence (AI) for
delivering legal services. The Department in its written submissions has stated that in order
to ensure legal rights of under-trial Prisoners and convicts are available round the clock, a
project for utilising Artificial Intelligence is being designed for intelligent data mining
and analysis of data. A.I. System has tremendous capacity of scanning through
lakhs of pages/entries/data in a matter of second and this would come handy to NALSA
in providing legal services to all the prison inmates and will also help in de-congestion of
jails.
6.65. It has been further stated that NALSA intends to fortify its drive for ensuring Access
to Justice for All by connecting the poor, disabled, weaker and marginalised Sections of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
73
the Society to the welfare and benevolent schemes floated by both State and Central
Government. As of now, NALSA is organising Legal Services Camps all over the country
whereby Ministries and Government Departments on the one hand and intended
beneficiaries on the other hand are brought together on a platform in a remote, rural and
suburban areas across the country so to connect them to each other. NALSA wants to
utilise A.I. System to continue this process of service delivery 24x7, 365 days on a virtual
platform. NALSA believes that Access to Justice is not limited to access to courts alone
rather it includes citizens access to all that is due to them under the beneficial schemes
of the Government. NALSA wishes to focus on 115 backward districts of the country to use
robustly the technology to uplift them from the darkness and object poverty. It has also been
informed that NALSA is in the process of digitizing its end-to-end functioning by becoming
paperless organisation and A.I. system will help in supervising its Pan India activities and
help, focus and ensure delivery of free legal services to one and all.
6.66. With regard to the steps taken for availability of lawyers at the time of registration
of FIR itself, the Department has informed the following in this regard:
• NALSA has advised all the DLSAs to have the information regarding the availability
of legal services, address, and telephone numbers of the DLSAs displayed at the
Duty Officer room of all Police Stations.
• DLSAs have nominated lawyers and PLVs to be available on call for providing
legal services at the police stations ht the stage of registration of FIR and also
whenever somebody is arrested and brought to the police station.
• NALSA has instituted telephone helpline number 15100 and the various State
Legal Services Authorities have their own helpline numbers on which any person
can call to seek legal aid or advice at any stage. These numbers are also to be
displayed at the police stations.
• In the coming years, NALSA is planning to install LED monitors at the important
police stations to disseminate information about the availability of free legal
services to the entitled categories of person.
6.67 As regards initiatives being taken for enhancing quality of legal services the
Committee was informed that NALSA is taking the following initiatives to enhance the
quality of legal services:
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
74
• A uniform method for selection of efficient panel lawyers is being finalized. As per
the present provisions of the NALSA Free and Competent Legal Services Regulations,
2010 the selection of panel lawyers is made by a Committee constituted by the
Executive Chairman of SLSA or the Chairman of the concerned District Legal
Services Authority. The Regulation provides for a minimum of three years experience
for a legal practitioner to be empanelled. Separate panels may be maintained for
dealing with different types of cases by selecting suitable lawyers. In the year
2017, NALSA had constituted a Committee headed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Suryakant, Executive Chairman, Chandigarh State Legal Services Authority to
suggest ways of having efficient lawyers on the panels. The Report of the
Committee is being finalised. It is being suggested that apart from inviting
applications, the Chairman and the Secretary of the Legal Services Institutions
would also identify that efficient lawyers for empanelment and request them to
take up legal aided cases. Different scales of fee can be adopted by SLSAs to have
more experienced advocates or advocates who have specialisation in particular
subject matters.
• Enhancement of lawyers fee: A minimum fee of Rs 750 per hearing in District
Courts, subject to a maximum of Rs 7500 per case and Rs 1000 in the High Court,
subject to maximum of Rs 10000 per case has been implemented by all SLSAs, apart
from fee for drafting of pleadings and various applications. The recommended fee
structure has a stipulation that the SLSAs would re-consider the fee structure every
three years.
• Regular training of Panel Lawyers being undertaken by all SLSAs. Two training
Modules have already been released and the third is likely to be released in March,
2018.
• Monitoring Committees at all levels are being strengthened.
6.68. On the query of the Members regarding mechanism to ensure that cases are allotted to
appropriate lawyers, the Department has submitted that the cases are usually marked to the
concerned lawyers by the Secretary of the Legal Services Institutions who are conversant
with the field of specialisation of the concerned panel lawyers. The Regulation 15 of the
NALSA Free and Competent Legal Services Regulations, 2010 also allows special
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
75
engagement of Senior Advocates in suitable cases, as deemed fit by the Hon'ble Chairman or
the Chairman of the concerned District Legal Services Authority.
6.69. Against the projected demand of Rs 140 crore, Grants-in-aid of Rs.80 crore have been
allocated for NALSA in BE (2018-19), which is a decrease of ₹ 20 crore over RE (2017-18).
The Member-Secretary, NALSA in his written submission to the queries of the Members of
the Committee submitted that the huge reduction in the allocation of about 43 % for
NALSA will have a grave impact on its ongoing efforts to reach out to the needy for their
legal empowerment. It will not only hamper the new initiatives but may also fall quite
short of fulfilling need for routine activities. He has accordingly, requested that grant may
be enhanced at RE stage.
TABLE NO. – XXVII
Financial Targets and Achievements from 2012-13 to 2017-18 (Till December) Grants-in-aid to NALSA
Rs. in lakhs
Year Funds Allocated Funds Released Funds Utilized
2012-13 4450.00 3900.00 3692.00
2013-14 10000.00 8044.00 6039.00
2014-15* 14200.00 8265.00 5602.00
2015-16# 14500.00 6797.00 6066.00
2016-17$ 14200.00 6367.00 11305.00
2017-18 10000.00 5440.00 5586.00
* The grant was received at the fag end of the year and hence, the grant could not be fully utilized. In addition to the grant given by NALSA, the SLSAs received lump sum grants under the 13th Finance Commission of India for legal aid activities and also for Lok Adalats, etc.
# The grant was received at the fag end of the year and hence, the grant could not be fully utilized.
$ The NALSA was having an unspent grant of Rs.57, 22, 41,804/- carried over from 2015-16. Together with the grant of Rs.63.67cr. released during the year the NALSA was having a total grant of Rs.120, 89, 41,804/-.
6.70. On the staff position in NALSA, the Committee was told that the proposed strength of
staff of the National Legal Services Authority is 52. However, at present, the sanctioned staff
strength is 34, out of which 10 posts are lying vacant. The Member-Secretary, NALSA in his written
submission to the Committee during the Demands for Grants (2018-19) submitted that the staff
strength at present is not adequate to handle the existing work load for the following reasons:
(a) Legal Services Authorities are also implementing victim compensation
scheme after the introduction of Section 357-A in the Code of Criminal
Procedure in the year 2009 and promulgation of victim compensation schemes
in consequent to the said section.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
76
(b) Reach out of the Legal Services Authorities has increased with the opening of
Legal Services Clinics in villages and urban areas and opening of Legal
Services. Moreover, front offices have also been opened for providing legal
aid and advice. This requires regular monitoring and assessment and further
policy making for making them effective; (c) At present 36 State Legal
Services Authorities, 648 District Legal Services Authorities and 2267 Taluk
Legal Services Committees are functional, apart from Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee and High Court Legal Services Committees across the
country. This necessitates formulation of effective legal aid programmes/
projects, apart from regular assessment and impact analysis. Hence, the same
requires more staff; (d) NALSA intends to use technology to facilitate access
to justice initiatives so that effective expeditious and quality legal services are
provided. This also requires technical staff having adequate knowledge of IT.
6.71 As per the Two Hundred and Sixty Eight Report of the Law Commission, 67 per
cent of India’s prison inmates are undertrial prisoners, who are presumably innocent
according to law. A majority of them (70.60 per cent) are illiterate or semiliterate and
belong to socio-economically marginalised groups. This has led to overcrowding of
prisons and violation of basic rights of prisoners. The Committee has been apprised of
the various measures being taken/proposed to taken by NALSA for undertrial prisoners
and convicts in jails, which include establishment of Legal Services Clinics in about
1070 jails to provide effective legal services, appointment of 9563 remand advocates,
working with undertrial Review Committees for release of prisoners who are entitled to
statutory bails, etc. Legal aid is a Constitutional imperative under Articles 14, 21 and 39
(A) of the Constitution of India. More so, Legal Services Act, 1987 has been enacted
with a view to provide legal aid and services to the indignant and vulnerable sections of
the society and promote legal awareness amongst them. To the query of the Committee
about the non-availability of Legal Services Clinics in certain jails, the Committee was
informed that 1070 Legal Services Clinics have been established various jails across the
country and in 168 jails it is yet to be established. The Committee is pained to note that
even after 30 years of the enactment of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, NALSA
has not be able to establish Legal Service Clinics in all the jails of the Country. The
Conditions of jails is the country is pitiable with overcrowding, lack of healthcare
facility, etc. In many cases prisoners with petty criminal charges are made to stay with
hardened criminals, leading to the making of potential criminals in future. There must
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
77
be segregation of criminals based on the nature of charges against them and under-trial
prisoners who have served fifty-percent of their term should be released as per Section
436A of the CrPC. However, it is constrained to note that the Constitutional
commitment to provide legal aid services from the time the accused is produced before
the Magistrate for the first time and thereafter each time he/she is produced for
remand, is not being fulfilled. The experience at the ground level is that the accused do
not get representation from the time of first remand as claimed by NALSA. It is usually
at a much later stage and in many cases at the time of evidence. By that time it is too
late to protect the rights of the accused. Also, there are issues of insufficient briefing and
instructions to the panel lawyers, as well as non-availability of translated material, etc.
that comes in the way of cause of justice for these people.
6.72. The Committee, therefore, recommends that NALSA should re-examine the
ground realities and take all necessary measures, like establishment of Legal Services
Clinics in all the jails, appointment of adequate number of remand advocates, working
with under trial Review Committees in close coordination, to ensure that the
constitutional rights of these prisoners are protected from the stage of first remand
itself and the prisons are decongested.
6.73. In most cases lawyers without much experience are empanelled who do not
understand the complexity of the crime. Also, in most cases the prisoners are unaware
of who is representing them and at what stage their case is. The Committee had
expressed displeasure over the quality of lawyers empanelled for providing legal aid in
its Ninety-first Report also. NALSA has informed that various steps are being taken to
appoint competent lawyers, including proposed amendment to the NALSA Free and
Competent Legal Services Regulations, 2010. The Committee also notes that the fee of the
panel lawyers has been recently enhanced by all SLSAs. It is a welcome step but the
Committee feels that it still may not be lucrative enough to attract talented lawyers. The
Committee feels that a lot more still needs to be done to attract talented lawyers and,
therefore, recommends that NALSA should take proactive measures to ensure that only
competent lawyers are appointed on the panel. The Committee also suggests that the
performance of the lawyers already on the panel should be reviewed periodically for
improved results.
6.74 The Committee notes that the projected demand of NALSA has been curtailed
by ₹ 60 crore, which may affect its working during the current financial year.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
78
Furthermore, human resource constraints may also have impact on its functioning. The
Constitutional commitment of the State to afford equal opportunity to all to secure
justice may be hampered due to inadequacy of funds or human resource constraints.
The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Government should appropriately
enhance Grants-in-aid made available to the Authority and also take immediate
measures to fill vacant posts so that the activities of NALSA do not suffer.
SECOND NATIONAL JUDICIAL PAY COMMISSION (SNJPC)
6.75. The Supreme Court of India vide its order dated 9th May, 2017 in the All India Judges
Association vs. Union of India & others, directed the Government to appoint a Judicial Pay
Commission to review the pay scales, emoluments and service conditions of the Judicial
Officers of Subordinate Judiciary. Accordingly, the Second National Judicial Pay
Commission was constituted for Subordinate Judiciary to examine the present structure of
emoluments and conditions of service of Judicial Officers in the States and UTs. The
Commission aims to evolve the principles which would govern pay structure and other
emoluments of Judicial Officers belonging to the Subordinate Judiciary of the country. It will
examine the work methods and work environment as also the variety of allowance and
benefits in kind that are available to Judicial Officers in addition to pay and suggest
rationalization and simplification thereof. The Commission is headed by Shri Justice Retd. J.
P. Venkatrama Reddi, former Judge of Supreme Court of India, Shri R. Basant, former Judge
of the Kerala High Court as Member. It will make recommendations to Government within a
period of 18 months2.
6.76. The Committee is happy to note that the Government has constituted the Second
National Judicial Pay Commission to examine the pay/emoluments/service conditions of
subordinate judiciary in the country. The pay scales of judicial officers are not uniform
across the country. The objective of the Commission for bringing parity amongst the
judges (5927) in subordinate courts of similar rank across the States is laudable. The
Committee is of the view that the recommendations of the Commission would help in
strengthening subordinate judiciary, thereby promoting judicial efficiency and
administration in the country.
2 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=173388
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
79
VACANCIES AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN SUBORDINATE COURTS
6.77. Constitution of India has provided for a single integrated system of Courts to
administer and interpret both Union and State laws. The Supreme Court being the highest
court of appeal is at the top of hierarchy as per Article 124 of the Constitution, followed by
High Courts at State levels as per Article 214 which caters to one or more than one States.
Below High Courts exist subordinate Courts comprising District Courts at district level and
other lower Courts at taluk levels. Chapter IV of Part V and Chapter VI of Part VI of Indian
Constitution talk about the Union Judiciary and Subordinate Courts, respectively.
6.78. The Supreme Court, through a judicial order, has devised a process and time frame to
be followed for the filling up of vacancies in subordinate judiciary. The order of January
2007 by the Supreme Court stipulates that the process for recruitment of judges in the
subordinate courts would commence on March 31st of a calendar year and end by October
31st of the same year. The Supreme Court has permitted State Governments/ High Courts to
seek variations in the time schedule in case of any difficulty, having regard to the peculiar
geographical and climatic conditions in the State or other relevant conditions.
TABLE NO. – XXVIII
State/UT-wise details of vacancies of Judges in District and Subordinate Courts vis-a-vis State/UT- wise details of pending cases in District and Subordinate Courts
Sl. No. Name of States/UTs Vacancies as on 31.12.2017
Number of cases pending in District and Subordinate
Courts as on 01.01.2018
(31.12.2017 was on Sunday) $$
1 Andhra Pradesh & Telangana** 114 915410
2 Arunachal Pradesh*** 11 N.A. 3 Assam*** 76 223954
4 Bihar 835 1658292
5 Chhattisgarh*** 63 272888
6 Goa*** 12 39745
7 Gujarat 375 1641355
8 Haryana*** 147 645647
9 Himachal Pradesh 11 209938
10 Jammu & Kashmir 29 121754
11 Jharkhand** 251 333494
12 Karnataka*** 326 1381438
13 Kerala*** 80 1152056
14 Madhya Pradesh 728 1325053
15 Maharashtra*** 149 3336574
16 Manipur** 18 9604
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
80
17 Meghalaya*** 58 7032
18 Mizoram*** 33 3306
19 Nagaland*** 11 N.A.
20 Orissa 204 1022635
21 Punjab*** 136 568232
22 Rajasthan*** 101 1424560
23 Sikkim*** 8 1400
24 Tamil Nadu* 341 1010381
25 Tripura*** 31 25191
26 Uttar Pradesh 1348 6161822
27 Uttarakhand*** 60 210587
28 West Bengal and A & N Island *** 40 1770820
29 Chandigarh*** 0 38628
30 D & N Haveli and Daman & Diu*** 0 5298
31 Delhi** 316 607036
32 Lakshadweep*** 1 N.A. 33 Pondicherry* 14 N.A. Total 5,927 26124130
* Details of Vacancies of Judges as on 07.11.2017/**Details of vacancies of Judges as on 31.10.2017 /***Details of vacancies of Judges as on 30.11.2017/ $$ source: NJDG Web portal.
Note : Data on District and Subordinate Courts in the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and Union Territories of Lakshadweep and Puducherry are not available on the web-portal of NJDG.
6.79. As per the Concept Note 3 of Supreme Court of India on District Judiciary
Recruitment Examination, the sanctioned strength of district and subordinate judges in India
is approximately 21000 today. Of these, approximately 4800 positions are vacant. While the
exact numbers are not available, it can be assumed that 25 percent of these are district judges,
of which 25 percent are to be recruited through direct recruitment/examination, as per All
India Judges Association & Ors. v. UOI &Ors. [(2010) 15 SCC 170]. This means that on an
annual basis, there are likely to be approximately 300 vacancies that need to be filled up each
year.
6.80. The Committee is concerned with the large number of vacancy positions of
judicial officers and judges in subordinate judiciary. As per the data available, at
present 5927 positions of judicial officers are vacant in different States. The Vacancy is
highest in the States of Uttar Pradesh (1348), Bihar (835), Madhya Pradesh (728),
Gujarat (375) and Tamil Nadu (341). Since appointment of subordinate judicial officers
falls under the domain of State Government, the Committee recommends the
Department of Justice to impress upon the State Government to initiate appointment of
judicial officers. The Committee is of the view that recruitment and training of judicial
personnel and supporting staffs at Subordinate Courts may help in reducing the
3http://www.sci.gov.in/pdf/LU/Concept%20Note.pdf
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
81
pendency of cases and the judge-population ratio may be corrected by appointing more
judges in the Subordinate Courts to reduce pendency. The Committee further
recommends the Department to explore the option of creation of All India Judicial
Services to fill-up the vacancies.
6.81. The Committee is pained to note that huge pendency of cases exists in the
Subordinate Judiciary. The pendency is highest in the States of Uttar Pradesh
(6161822), Maharashtra (3336574), West Bengal (1770820), Bihar (1658292) and
Gujarat (1641355).The Committee in its 67th Report on the Infrastructure Development
and Strengthening of Subordinate Courts (2014) expressed its serious concern over the
large number of vacancies existing in the Subordinate Courts and recommended that
vacancies of judicial officers need to be filled-up as both vacancy of judicial officers and
pendency of cases are closely related to each other. The Committee further
recommended that regular conducting of morning/evening, holiday courts, lokadalats,
alternative dispute redressal mechanisms etc., wherever feasible, can help in reducing
the problem of pendency of cases in Subordinate Judiciary. Sincere efforts are also
required on the part of State governments to fill the existing vacancies in the
Subordinate Courts, so that the disposal rate of cases may be enhanced.
VACANCIES AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN SUPREME COURT AND HIGH
COURTS
6.82. Judges of High Courts are appointed under articles 217 (1) and 224 of the
Constitution. Judges of the High Courts are appointed as per the procedure laid down in the
Memorandum of Procedure prepared in 1998 pursuant to the Supreme Court Judgement of
October 6, 1993 (Second Judges case) read with their Advisory Opinion of October 28, 1998
(Third Judges case). As per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointment of Judges
of High Courts, the initiation of proposal for appointment of Judges in the Supreme Court
vests with the Chief Justice of India, while initiation of proposal for appointment of Judges in
the High Court vests with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court. As per the existing
Memorandum of Procedure, the following timelines have been prescribed:
TABLE NO. – XXIX
Activities Timelines
Proposal to be initiated by Chief Justice of High Court 6 months before occurrence of vacancy
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Chief Minister/Governor to recommend proposal received from the Chief Justice of High Court
Chief Justice of India/Supreme Court Collegium to recommend the proposal of MLJ
Recommendations of CJI to PM for advising the President for approval
6.83. The Members of the
(2018-19) raised concern with
Court Advocates-on-Record Association
known as Second Judges Case,
6.84. Nearly, 37 percent of
vacancies exist in all the High
the Supreme Court is 31. As on
vacancies to be filled up. A s
vacancies of Judges in the Supreme
2018 is given below:-
82
Chief Minister/Governor to recommend proposal received from the Chief Justice of High Court
Within six weeks
Chief Justice of India/Supreme Court Collegium to recommend the proposal of MLJ
Within four weeks
Recommendations of CJI to PM for advising the President Within three weeks
Committee during the meeting on the Demands
with regard to the non-adherence of guidelines laid
Association and another vs. Union of India
Case, in the appointment of judges.
of the approved strength of Judges in High
High Courts, except Sikkim High Court. The approved
on 1st February, 2018, 25 Judges are in position
statement showing the approved strength, working
Supreme Court of India and the High Courts,
TABLE NO. – XXX
Within six weeks
Within four weeks
Within three weeks
Demands for Grants
laid in the Supreme
India (1993), popularly
High Courts is vacant;
approved strength of
position and there are 6
working strength and
as on 1st February,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
83
PENDENCY OF CASES
6.85. The high rate of pending cases in Higher Judiciary is a serious matter. The
Department in its written replies to the questionnaire informed that more than 55495 cases are
pending in Supreme Court of India as on the 1st January, 2018. Similarly, 34.27 lakh cases are
pending in High Courts for the same period.
TABLE NO. – XXXI
High Court-wise details of pending cases
S.No. Name of the Court Number of cases pending in High Courts as on January,
2018 $$
A. Supreme Court of India 55459*
B. High Courts
1 Allahabad N.A.
2 Calcutta 232116
3 Gauhati 39191
4 Bombay 464074
5 Chhattisgarh 59463
6 Delhi 69546
7 Gujarat 109709
8 Himachal Pradesh 37955
9 Jammu and Kashmir N.A.
10 Jharkhand 57944
11 Karnataka 211110
12 Kerala 181114
13 Madhya Pradesh 307384
14 Manipur 16889
15 Meghalaya 951
16 Punjab And Haryana 384098
17 Rajasthan 263103
18 Sikkim 212
19 Tripura 2798
20 Uttarakhand 36910
21 Madras 314345
22 Orissa 168375
23 Patna 145056
24 Telangana And Andhra Pradesh 325119
Total Pending Cases 3427462
*Pending Cases in Supreme Court as on 22.12.2017
$$ Source: High Court Data as per NJDG Web portal
Note : Data on Allahabad and Jammu & Kashmir High Courts are not available on the web-portal of NJDG.
6.86. The Committee is concerned with the large number of vacancies of Judges in
High Courts and also took note of problem in its Eighty-seventh and Ninety-first
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
84
Reports. The vacancy of judges in very high in High Courts of Allahabad (56),
Karnataka (38), Calcutta ( 39), Punjab& Haryana (35), Telangana & Andhra Pradesh
(30) and Bombay (24). The Committee notes that the guidelines laid in the Supreme
Court Advocates-on-Record Association and another vs. Union of India (1993), popularly
known as Second Judges Case, for the appointment of judges are not being adhered to
by the High Courts, which is the responsibility of the Supreme Court in its
administrative side to direct the concerned High Courts to initiate the process of filling-
up the vacancies in advance. The Committee is of the view that to reduce pendency of
cases, the existing vacancy positions of judges need to be filled up immediately and the
vacancies arising in future should be filled strictly as per the guidelines in the Second
Judges Case. The Committee in its Eighty-seventh Report on “Inordinate Delay in
Filling up the Vacancies in the Supreme Court and High Courts” recommended for
raising the age of retirement of Supreme Court judges to 67 years and of High Court
judges to 65 years. The Committee again reiterates its recommendation as it feels that it
would help in retaining the existing judges, which in turn would help in reducing both
vacancy and pendency of cases in the short run.
SCHEDULED LANGUAGES IN HIGHER JUDICIARY
6.87. Article 348 of the Constitution deals with the Language to be used in the Supreme
Court and in the High Courts and for Acts, Bills, etc. Clause (1) (a) of the Article says that
notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Part, until Parliament by law
otherwise provides, all proceedings in the Supreme Court and in every High Court should be
in English. However, it further says that, notwithstanding anything in sub clause (a) of clause
(1), the Governor of a State may, with the previous consent of the President, authorise the use
of the Hindi language, or any other language used for any official purposes of the State, in the
proceedings in the High Court having its principal seat in that State: Provided that nothing in
this clause shall apply to any judgment, decree or order passed or made by such High Court.
6.88. The language used in legal judgments/pronouncements in higher judiciary is English
as per the Article 348 of the Constitution. However, only a few States have adopted English
as official language. Many States, including Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and Chhattisgarh had sent
requests to the Government seeking the consent of the President of India under Article 348
(2) of the Constitution, for the use of the official language of the State in the proceedings of
the High Courts of their States. The Government took up these requests with the Supreme
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Court of India, however, the request
by the Apex Court4.
6.89. The Committee has
Seventy-fifth and Eighty-fourth
17), and had observed that
State, other than English, with
Court of that State. The
languages of the State other
Courts, provided it is demanded
was further of the view that
the Constitutional provisions
High Courts and accordingly,
mandate of Article 348. The
REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN
6.90. The overall representation
In the recent times, various reports
women in Judiciary. The Vidhi
Gender Imbalance in Lower
judges in the lower judiciary
judges. The women representation
average of 27.6 percent is: Uttar
& Kashmir (18.62), Gujarat (15.11)
Gender Composition
4 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=132952
85
request to use official languages of the State
examined the above issue in its earlier
fourth Reports on the Demands for Grants
Article 348 provides for the use of Official
with the consent of the Governor of the
Committee had, accordingly, recommended
other than English may be permitted to be
demanded by the concerned State Government.
that the consultation process with judiciary
provisions are amply clear on the use of Scheduled
accordingly, the use of official languages should be decided
Committee reiterates its above recommendations.
WOMEN IN JUDICIARY
representation of women in judiciary is a cause of concern
reports in media highlighted the poor state of
Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy in its Report “Tiltin
Judiciary (2018)” highlighted the fact that
judiciary across India, 11,397 are male judges and
representation in subordinate judiciary of States that is
Uttar Pradesh (21.4), Nagaland (19.5, Jharkhand
(15.11) and Bihar (15.52).
TABLE NO.- XXXII
Composition in Lower Judiciary in the Country
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=132952
State were not accepted
Reports also, viz.
(2015-16 & 2016-
Official language of the
State in the High
recommended that official
used in the High
Government. The Committee
is not required as
Scheduled Languages in the
decided as per the
recommendations.
concern in the country.
of representation of
“Tilting the Scale:
out of total 15,959
and 4,409 are women
is below the national
Jharkhand (13.98), Jammu
Country
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
86
6.91. The fate of representation of women in Higher Judiciary is only 10 percent (approx.),
as against 27 percent (approx) in Subordinate Courts. Even in the Supreme Court of India,
out of 24 incumbent judges, there is only one woman judge. The Times of India in an article
dated 30th October, 2017, highlighted the poor state of representation of women in the higher
judiciary. The details are as under:
TABLE NO. - XXXIII
Gender Composition in Higher Judiciary5
High Courts Total
Strength
Women
Judges
% Women
Judges
Bombay 73 11 15
Delhi 38 10 26
Madras 53 7 13
Calcutta 35 4 11
Gujarat 31 4 13
Allahabad 110 6 5
All 24 HCs 692 70 10
6.92. Since Independence, only 6 women judges have been appointed in the Supreme
Court of India, first being in 1989. The Committee, accordingly, desires that the Bench
of Higher Judiciary be reflective of composition of the society and its diversity and
recommends that suitable measures be taken to include more and more Women judges
in both Higher and Subordinate Judiciary. Certain States like Bihar (35 percent),
Andhra Pradesh (33.33) Odisha (33.33), Telangana (33.33, Assam (30 percent),
Rajasthan (30 percent) Tamil Nadu (30 percent), Karnataka (30 percent), Uttrakhand
(30), Uttar Pradesh (20 percent) and Jharkhand (5 percent) have introduced reservation
for women in subordinate judiciary. The Committee is further of the view that quota of
supernumerary (over and above the actual intake) as done in the case of Indian Institute
of Technology may be replicated in the admission of five year law programmes,
particularly in the National Law Universities. The Committee reiterates the
recommendation in its Eighty-fourth Report on the Demands for Grants (2016-17) that
the strength of women judges should be around 50 percent of the total strength of the
judges. The Committee desires that the Department should request the State
Governments to introduce quota for women in Law Universities and subordinate
judiciary recruitment.
5 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/women-account-for-less-than-28-of-total-judges-in-
country/articleshow/61329003.cms
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
DEMAND
7.0. Demand No. 63 pertains
Supreme Court of India is ‘Charged’
India in BE (2018-19) is 251.06
heads are the salary, office expenses
the BE (2018-19) as against
below:-
Head
Salaries
Total - A
Non-Salary
Medical Treatment
Overtime Allowance
Domestic Travel Expenses
Foreign Travel Expenses
Office Expenses
Publications
Deptt. Canteen
Professional Services
Total - B
Total (A + B)
7.1. Under the sub-head ‘Publications’
lakh, which is same as BE &
only 14.94 lakh against 20
Registrar, Supreme Court of India
Grants (2018-19) informed the
Journal of Supreme Court Decisions’
language. The Official Languages
for the official purposes of the
and State, Acts and for certain
87
CHAPTER – VII
DEMAND NO. 63: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
pertains to the Supreme Court of India. The
‘Charged’. The total Budget Estimates of the
251.06 crore as against 255 crore in RE (2017
expenses and Professional Service for BE (2016
the BE and RE (2017-18) and Actuals of (2016
TABLE NO. - XXXIV (
BE 2016-17
Àctuals 2016-17
B.E. 2017-18
R.E. 2017-18
154880 1927488 2070000 1922200
1548800 1927488 2070000 1922200
50000 65813 60000 70000
600 351 600 600
Expenses 6000 5231 6000 6000
15000 34274 25000 25000
214400 241139 239400 382200
2000 1494 4000 4000
7000 9440 10000 10000
55000 62258 55000 130000
350000 420000 400000 627800
189880 2347488 2470000 2550000
‘Publications’ the proposed allocation in BE
RE (2017-18). However, the Actual Expenditure
20 lakh in BE (2016-17). To the query of the
India while deposing before the Committee on
the Committee that the ‘The Supreme Court
Decisions’ is being presently regularly published
Languages Act, 1963 provides for the languages which
the Union, for transaction of business in Parliament,
certain purposes in High Courts. The Members
allocation for the
the Supreme Court of
(2017-18). The major
(2016-17). Details of
(2016-17) are given
in thousand)
B.E. 2018-19
2000000
2000000
70000
600
10000
30000
300000
4000
11000
85000
510600
2510600
BE (2018-19) is 40
Expenditure (2016-17) was
the Committee, the
on the Demands for
Court Records-Official
published only in English
which may be used
Parliament, for Central
Members of the Committee
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
88
raised issues relating to non-publication of certain documents in Hindi language, along with
English by the Apex Court as per the mandate of the Official Languages Act, 1963.
7.2. The Committee notes that out of 251 crores in BE (2018-19), which is a
decrease of 4 crore against RE (2017-18), 40 lakh is proposed under the head
‘Publication’. The Committee also notes that the Supreme Court has not been able to
spend funds allotted to it under the head ‘Publication’ in BE (2016-17), as only 14.94
lakh were spent out of the allocation of 20 lakh under the said head. As per the
Official Languages Act, 1963, every Government department is required to publish
documents in Hindi version, along with English. The Committee accordingly adjures
the Registrar, Supreme Court of India to publish report in Hindi.
- - - - -
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
89
RECOMMENDATIONS AT A GLANCE
CHAPTER – II
AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS DURING 2018-19
1. The Committee observes that in BE (2018-19), allocation to the Ministry was
enhanced by 242.67 crore over BE (2017-18). Similarly, allocations of Election
Commission of India and Supreme Court of India were enhanced by 121.96 crore and
4.06 crore respectively. However, the allocation in BE (2018-19) is substantially low as
compared to projection by the Departments under the Ministry and the Election
Commission of India. As per the data provided, the Ministry had projected a
requirement of ₹ 6550.38 crore for BE 2018-19 to the Ministry of Finance, against which
an allocation of only ₹ 4386.33 crore has been approved, which is just 67% of the
allocation sought from the Ministry of Finance. Similarly, the Election Commission of
India had projected a requirement of Rs 413.82 crore, against which an allocation of
only ₹ 267.96 crore has been approved, which is just 65% of the allocation sought from
the Ministry of Finance. This indicates that either the projections of the
Ministry/Commission were overestimated or they have received inadequate funds.
[Para 2.23]
2. The Ministry of Law and Justice and organisations under its administrative
control play a very important role in bringing reforms in the Indian Legal System to
achieve expansion, inclusion and excellence in legal education, the legal profession and
legal aid services. They need sufficient funds to cater to their requirements; to execute
ongoing schemes/programmes and to initiate new schemes/programmes. Thus, the
Committee strongly recommends that the Ministry and its organizations are allocated
sufficient funds in the FY 2018-19 to carry out its mandate and additional requirement
of funds may be provided at the RE stage. The Committee makes similar
recommendation for the Election Commission of India so that the activities of the
Commission are not hampered due to paucity of funds. [Para 2.24]
3. The Committee after analyzing the trend of expenditure in the FY 2017-18 in the
Ministry observes that as on 21st February, 2018, the Ministry has been able to spend
about 92 percent of the funds under schemes. However, the spending under the non-
scheme heads is only 71.16, 68.7 and 57.5 percent, respectively, for the Department of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
90
Legal Affairs, Legislative Department and Department of Justice as on 5th February,
2018. As per the instructions of the Ministry of Finance, expenditure in the last quarter
is to be restricted to 33% ceiling and last month (March) expenditure to 15% ceiling.
Thus, performance of the Ministry in terms of utilization of funds under schemes leaves
much to be desired. A focused planning and close monitoring of utilization of funds is
required on the part of the Ministry. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the
Ministry should identify the bottlenecks responsible for not being able to maintain the
pace of utilization required as per the instructions of the Ministry of Finance and take
remedial measures so as to improve its performance in utilization of scheme funds in the
future. [Para 2.25]
CHAPTER - III
4. There are twenty two languages specified under VIII Schedule of the
Constitution which includes six classical languages i.e. Tamil, Sanskrit, Malayalam,
Kannad, Telugu and Odia. Article 343 stipulates that the official language of the Union
shall be in Hindi in Devanagri Script and English. The Official Language Act, 1963 and
the Official Language Rules, 1970, promotes use of Hindi progressively in official work
in addition to English. Article 345 of the Constitution mentions that official language of
a State may be one or more languages or Hindi or English. Article 120 of the
Constitution mentions that the business in Parliament shall be transacted in Hindi or in
English. Similarly Article 210 mentions that the business in the legislature of a State
shall be transacted in the official language of the State or in Hindi or in English. Article
351 cast duty upon the Union Government to promote Hindi having special reference to
composite culture of India and for its vocabulary reliance is placed primarily on
Sanskrit and secondarily on other languages. Article 350 gives a constitutional right to
every citizen of the country to send petition to any authority of the Union or the State in
any languages used in the Union or in the State as the case may be. [Para 3.4]
5. Out of twenty two languages specified VIII Schedule of Constitution. The
Legislative Department brings out authoritative texts of Constitution in sixteen
languages. Those are Assamees, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannad, Telugu, Tamil,
Kashmiri, Konkari, Malayalam, Marathi, Punjabi, Odia, Urdu, Sindhi, Sanskrit and
Nepali. The Legislative Department is responsible for translation of Central Legislation
both supreme and subordinate in languages mentioned in VIII Schedule of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
91
Constitution. The Constitution of India also needs to be made available in those
languages. The Legislative Department in their submission informed the Committee
that the updated diglot edition of Constitution is to be published, while Constitution in
other languages have not yet been updated in other languages. The Committee,
therefore, exhorts the Department to expedite authoritative translation of Constitution
and other Central Legislation complied on Bharat Sanhita (India Code) for
popularisation of law amongst people speaking those languages. [Para 3.5]
6. The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirteenth Amendment) Bill, 2010 changed
the name of Orissa to Odisha and the Oriya language to Odia. However, in the Annual
Report, 2017-18 of the Ministry old nomenclature is still used. The Department is
accordingly, recommended to update and use the new nomenclature in future reports.
[Para 3.6]
7. The Committee also recommends the Department to use simple day to day
vocabulary in Hindi, wherever possible, and simply the legal terminology for the
understanding of the common people of the country. The Department may also explore
the possibility of creating a separate webpage where all the Acts/Ordinances/Rules
translated by it in regional languages are available. The Committee further
recommends the Department to recruit more language officers or engage experts or
consultants so that legal texts and documents could be simplified and translated in
regional languages for the understanding of the common people. [Para 3. 7]
CHAPTER - IV
8. The Committee observes that as against the projection of 413.82 crore, only
267.96 crore have been allocated in BE (2018-19), which is a short fall of 145.86 crore
(35 percent approx), with major reductions being under the head Information
technology and voters awareness. The Committee is of the view that with the increased
penetration of internet in the country and the focus of Government on programmes like
Digital India to reach out to common people, information technology has become
crucial medium to reach large number of voters in a very short time. However, the
Committee notes that the allocation under the head Information technology and voters
awareness is less than the projected demand of the Commission which may affect the
activities of the Commission in the coming General Elections to the Lok Sabha in 2019.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
92
The Committee, accordingly, recommends that, if needed, allocations for it should be
enhanced suitably at RE stage so that activities of the ECI are not adversely affected
due to want of funds. [Para 4.2]
Systematic Voters Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP)
9. The Committee appreciates programmes like Systematic Voters Education and
Electoral Participation (SVEEP) as it feels that they are very important to raise voters
awareness about the importance of election in a democracy and right and
responsibilities of citizens, which in-turn are very important in increasing voters turn-
out. The Committee, accordingly, reiterates its recommendations contained in Ninety-
first Report of the Committee on the Demands for Grants (2017-18) that important
initiatives like SVEEP should not be crippled for want of adequate funds. However, the
Committee is also pained to note that as on September, 2017, the Actual Expenditure of
the Commission under the Head Voters Awareness was only 8.4 crore and
accordingly, recommends the ECI also to project its demands realistically in its future
demands. [Para 4.4]
INDIA INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DEMOCRACY AND ELECTION MANAGEMENT (IIIDEM)
10. The Committee appreciates the activities of the IIIDEM and of the considered
opinion that after the completion of permanent campus of the Institute this year its
activities/programmes would go-up further. The Committee also appreciates the
initiatives of IIIDEM in conducting training programmes for election official of others
countries and desires that appropriate measures may be taken to invite more and more
countries, especially developing countries to built human resource capacities and
promote Indian global standing. [Para 4.7]
COMMON ELECTORAL ROLL
11. The Committee notes that preparation of Electoral roll involves huge
expenditure, manpower and time. Preparation of electoral roll by ECI and SECs
involves some amount of duplication of efforts as the voter is the same for election to
different bodies. It is understood that common electoral roll would save time, money
and manpower of the nation besides removing inconsistencies between two sets of
electoral roll and resultant confusion in the mind of the voter. It also limits the scope for
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
93
electoral malpractices. The Committee accordingly, reiterates its recommendation
contained in the 75th Report of the Committee on the Demands for Grants (2015-16) and
impresses upon the Election Commission of India and the State Election Commissions
to conduct various elections from local bodies to Parliament on the basis of a common
electoral roll. The Committee also recommends the ECI to co-ordinate with and
convinces the State Election Commissions to update the voter database already
available online for the purpose of PRIs and Municipalities elections. The Committee
also recommends the Legislative Department to bring out amendment in the extant
legislations for evolving a common electoral roll. [Para 4.11]
ELECTORS PHOTO IDENTITY CARDS
12. The Committee appreciates the steps undertaken by the Commission for EPIC
coverage in most of the States of the country. The Committee hopes that the Election
Commission would achieve the target of 100 percent before the next General Election to
Lok Sabha especially in States like Assam, Chhatisgarh and Jammu & Kashmir. The
Committee further recommends the commission to improve photo quality of the Elector
Voter Identity Card, as in many cases it becomes difficult to recognize person in the
card, which in turn raises the probability of mal-practices during the voting by the
elector. [Para 4.19]
CHAPTER - V
13. The Committee notes that the Department proposes to take some steps aimed
towards curtailment of legal cases on behalf of the Union of India and its Organisations,
Departments, etc. and requires budgetary support for the same. The Committee
recognizes that the Government and its various agencies are the predominant litigants
in courts and tribunals in the country. It feels that all necessary steps must be taken to
reduce Government litigation in courts so that valuable court time is spent in resolving
other pending cases so as to reduce average pendency time. In view thereof, the
Committee recommends that adequate budgetary support should be provided to the
Department to formulate and implement the proposed Legal Research & Education
Promotion Development Scheme (LREPDS). [Para 5.5]
14. The Committee also notes that Department in its written replies to the
questionnaire has submitted that at present, there is no specific policy in vogue on
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
94
litigation. A ‘National Litigation Policy’ was drafted in the year 2010 but has not been
finalized so far. At present, it is under active consideration of the Government. The
Committee recommends that the ‘National Litigation Policy’ should be finalized and
implemented by the Government on a priority basis to reduce delays and arrears in the
system in order to achieve the objectives of the National Mission for Justice Delivery
and Legal Reforms. [Para 5.6]
15. The Committee observes that Rs 70 crore has been allocated to ITAT under the
Budgetary sub-head ‘Capital Outlay’ in BE 2018-19 but the same will not be sufficient
and may affect the construction work of the ongoing projects. It has an additional
requirement of funds to the tune of Rs 47 crore. The Committee recommends that the
budgetary allocation for acquisition of land and construction of buildings for ITAT
under the Major head 4070 should be enhanced from Rs 70 crore to Rs 117 crore in RE
2018-19 so that their projects are not stalled. The Committee also notes that under this
sub-head, the pace of utilization of funds by ITAT has been slow over the years, leading
to steep reduction of funds at the RE stage. The Budget allocation for 2017-18 was Rs 71
crore, which was reduced at the RE stage to Rs 31 crore. ITAT has been able to utilize
only 43.98% of the funds allocated in RE 2017-18 up to 5th February, 2018. The
Committee, therefore, recommends that the ITAT and the Department should ensure
proposed projects timely commence, and there should be strict monitoring of their
progress and the pace of expenditure, so as to avoid fund reduction at the RE stage by
the Ministry of Finance. [Para 5.7]
Challenges before the Department: Shortage of staff
16. The Committee observes that there is an overall shortage of manpower of
around 25% in the Department and the situation is even worse in the ILS cadre, where
around 37% of the posts are lying vacant. The Committee notes that this is a perennial
problem in the Department and the Committee had recommended for urgent redressal
of the causes responsible for this state of Affairs in its Ninety-first Report also. Further,
the Committee infers from the reply of the Department that the remedial actions being
taken by it are not yielding the desired results and there are still huge vacancies existing
in the Department. [Para 5.13]
17. The Committee expresses its serious concern over the acute shortage of officers
in the Department, particularly of the ILS cadre. The ILS officers are the Principal
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
95
Legal Advisers to the Government and play a pivotal role in both advisory as well as in
drafting work and their persistent shortage is sure to affect adversely the functioning of
the Government.The Committee, accordingly, recommends that the causes responsible
for this state of affairs should be identified and proactive steps, including expediting the
amendment of the Indian Legal Service Rules, 1957, must be undertaken to fill up the
existing vacancies in a time bound manner. Present pace of efforts to fill up vacancies is
inadequate and an effective mechanism in consultation with the concerned agencies like
DoPT, UPSC and SSC, should be evolved for timely filling of vacancies. The Committee
further suggests that the Department should proactively pursue the court cases for early
decisions. Further, in the Action Taken Replies to this Report, the Committee may be
informed about the timelines for filling up of vacancies in different grades in the
Department. [Para 5.14]
LAW OFFICERS
18. The Committee observes that of the total sanctioned strength of 25 Law Officers,
9 posts (36%) are presently lying vacant, including the post of Solicitor General of
India, who is second law officer of the country and assists the Attorney General of
India. The Law Officers are entrusted with the responsibility of advising the
Government of India on legal matters referred to them; appearing before the Supreme
Court and any High Court on behalf of the Government of India in cases in which the
Government of India is concerned as a party or is otherwise interested; representing the
Government of India in any reference made by the President to the Supreme Court
under Article 143 of the Constitution; etc. In view of such important duties entrusted to
them, the Committee feels that it is vital for the Government to fill these vacancies
expeditiously so that its functioning is not affected adversely. [Para 5.18]
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT)
19. The Committee observes that as per the data provided by the Department, a
large number of vacancies exist in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal across the board.
This is a long standing issue and is a matter of serious concern, particularly with respect
to vacancies in the post of Members of the Tribunal. The Committee fails to understand
why no solution has been found to deal effectively with this problem even after so many
years. The Department has itself admitted that due to vacancy in the posts of Members,
some of the Benches are not functioning regularly, resulting in increased pendency. The
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
96
Committee expresses its dismay over this state of affairs and urges the Government to
analyse the causes responsible for the perennial problem of shortage of manpower in
the Tribunal and take immediate remedial measures to fill the vacancies in a time
bound manner so that the Tribunal functions optimally. Also, in the Action Taken
Replies on the recommendations contained in this Report, the Department should
submit a roadmap for filling of vacancies in the post of Members well in time to ensure
that all the Benches of the Tribunal can function regularly. [Para 5.27]
20. The Committee notes that between 2004-05 and 2009-10, the disposal rate was
much higher than the number of cases instituted. The trend reversed between 2010-11
and 2014-15. Then again from 2015-16 onwards the rate of disposal has been higher
than the institution rate, as a result of which pendency has come down from more than
1 lakh cases in 2014-15 to around 92,000 cases as on the 31stDecember, 2017. The
Committee observes that though, with the existing strength of Members, the pendency is
not growing but a huge backlog of cases continues to exist, which is a cause of serious
concern. The Committee has been informed of the series of measures being taken by the
Tribunal to reduce pendency of cases and that in this financial year up to 31st
December, 2017, an average of 50 appeals have been disposed of by each Member of the
Tribunal, which though is an improvement but is not commensurate with the disposal
rate of the year 2004-05. The Committee is of the view that the existing rate of disposal
is not likely to make a major dent in the backlog cases and without improving
incumbency of Members, the pendency situation is likely to remain grim. Besides, there
could be other factors also contributing to the pendency in the Tribunal. The
Committee recommends that the Department should undertake a comprehensive cause
analysis exercise for this state of affairs and take remedial measures urgently so that the
pendency shows substantial improvement and the Tribunal truly lives up to its motto of
‘Nishpaksh Sulabh Satvar Nyay’, which means impartial, easy and speedy justice. In
the Action Taken Replies to this Report, the Committee would like to be apprised of the
findings of the above exercise and the impact of the measures being taken by the
Tribunal, as stated above, to reduce pendency. [Para 5.28]
INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE
21. The Committee applauds the Indian Law Institute for the quality legal research
work being done by it. However, the Committee fails to appreciate the reluctance of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
97
Institute to become fully self-sustainable even after six decades of its establishment and
more than a decade after being granted deemed university status. The Committee notes
that there has been a persistent shortage of Teaching and Non-teaching staff in the
Institute but in the year 2017-18, only the post of Librarian was advertised. The
Committee notes with dismay that the Institute in not making any serious efforts to fill
vacant positions and is content to work with the existing staff strength. It is not inclined
to introduce more academic programmes and has also informed that it has reduced the
number of courses offered for greater emphasis on research activities. The Committee
feels that the Institute will not be deviating from its objective of promoting and
conducting legal research by expanding its academic activities. On the contrary, it will
be fulfilling its objective, which is also to promote the improvement of legal education,
and to impart instruction in law and allied fields. The Committee reiterates that
thevacant positions in ILI should be filled-up immediately so that it is able to expand its
activities and move in the direction of becoming a self-sustaining Institute, and avoid
being a permanent drag on public funds. However, Government funds may continue to
be provided for a limited period till it becomes fully self-sustained. As regards the
request of the Institute that it may be accorded the status of ‘Institute of National
Importance’, the Committee recommends that the Department of Legal Affairs should
examine the issue and share its opinion with the Committee. [Para 5.34]
NOTARIES APPOINTMENT
22. The Committee is of the view that Notaries are an important link in the judicial
system and provide cost effective services to public for various basic services viz.,
verification, authentication, certification of documents etc. in the country. The
Committee is, therefore, despondent to note that nation-wide more than 5000 vacancies
of Notaries exist under the Central Government quota. The data shows that 11
States/UTs do not have a single notary appointed and in most other States/UTs also,
there are huge vacancies. However, the Government is not taking any proactive
measures to fill them. The vacancies are not even advertised and the interested
candidates need to apply suo motu for the notaryship. Further, the Committee also
observes that the entire process of appointment of Notaries from application stage to
issue of Certificate of Practice takes an inordinate time; from interview to selection
alone, this period is almost 2-3 years. This state of affairs is completely unacceptable
and the Department should take immediate action to remedy the problem, starting by
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
98
advertising all the vacancies. Further, a reasonable time frame should be decided to
complete the entire process of selection of notaries and issue of Certificate of Practice.
The renewal of Certificate of Practice should also be done in a time bound manner. Just
because the Notaries Act, 1952 and Notaries Rules, 1956 do not prescribe specific time
limit for the exercise, it does not mean that the Department can unduly delay the entire
process, thereby causing hardship to the common people. The Committee recommends
that the Department should take immediate measures, including the ones suggested
above, to fill the existing vacancies in the notaries in a timely manner. The Committee
would like to be apprised of the progress made in this regard in the Action Taken
Replies of the Department to this Report. [Para 5.46]
CHAPTER - VI
SCHEMES OF THE DEPARTMENT AND BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS FOR THEM
(a) E-Courts Mission Mode Project (MMP)
23. The e-Courts Mission Mode Project is being implemented to put in place a
justice delivery system with efficiency, accessibility, affordability and is also more
transparency. The Committee notes that there is a shortfall of 268 crore in BE 2018-
19 allocations for this Project. Inadequate funding would adversely affect the
implementation of important components of the Project, leading to delays in its
completion. The Committee, therefore, recommends that adequate funds may be
provided for the Project so that it is not. The Committee, further, recommends that
periodic evaluation of the project be carried out so as to make timely intervention, if
any, needed for completion of the project, as scheduled. [Para 6.10]
24. The Committee is apprised that the National Judicial Data Grid provides a
variety of information to the litigants and judicial administration at various levels for
Case Management and Court Management. The Judicial administration of High Courts
and District Courts can make use of it for policy planning on cases and Court
management, equal and sufficient work to judicial officers, planning for more courts,
human resources, infrastructure, etc. It has features to evaluate judges’ performance.
The Committee feels that this could potentially be an important breakthrough for
judicial administration at various levels. The Committee suggests that the Department
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
99
should constitute a suitable body to analyse the data and put it to use so that the Grid
serves the purpose of unclogging the system. [Para 6.11]
(d) Scheme of Action Research and Studies on Judicial Reforms
25. The Committee observes that though the allocation for the Project in BE 2018-19
has been doubled from that in BE 2017-18; however, there is still a shortfall of Rs 3.5
crore from the projected amount. The reduced allocation may impact the activities
proposed in the project in FY 2018-19, which centre around developing capacities of
marginalized people to secure justice and supporting justice delivery organisations in
serving people better. The Committee, therefore, recommends that adequate funds
should be made available at RE stage for the Project in FY 2018-19 so that the activities
proposed under the Project are not hampered. [Para 6.20]
Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for the Judiciary, including establishment of Gram Nyayalayas
26. The Committee appreciates the activities under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme
for Infrastructure Development for Subordinate Judiciary and is of the view that
infrastructure development of courts is critical for timely delivery of justice. The
Committee observes that for achieving the measurable targets of construction of 1000
court halls and 600 residential units per year, the Government has approved an outlay
of ₹ 3,320 crore for three years (Rs 1000 crore for 2017-18, Rs 1110 crore for 2018-19
and Rs 1210 for 2019-2020). However, so far reduced allocations have been made for the
Scheme. In 2017-18, there was a shortfall of around Rs 370 crore and in BE 2018-19, it
is Rs 480.80 crore. The Committee feels that such a huge reduction in allocation for this
Scheme would make it impossible to achieve the measurable targets, which would
ultimately affect the justice delivery system. The Committee, accordingly, recommends
that the allocation under the CSS may be suitably enhanced at the RE Stage so that the
activities under the scheme do not suffer. [Para 6.29]
Gram Nyayalayas
27. The pace of establishment of Gram Nyayalayas has been very slow; only 343
Gram Nyayalayas have been notified by 11 States so far and out of these only 210 are
functional in 9 States. The Committee has been expressing concern regarding this state
of affairs for a long time. The Committee has been of the view that delegation of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
100
responsibility to establish Gram Nyayalayas to High Courts and State Governments in
Conference of Chief Justices of High Courts and Chief Ministers of the States since 2013
has not seen any heartening improvement. Therefore, in its Ninety-fourth, the
Committee had suggested that the Department should explore a tri-partite model so
that expertise of the Department could also be utilized in establishing Gram
Nyayalayas. The Committee also notes that the Evaluation agency of the Scheme,
National Productivity Council, has recommended for continuation of the Scheme with
detailed operational guidelines, enhanced central assistance and improved monitoring
mechanisms. [Para 6.36]
28. The Committee feels that though the institution of Gram Nyayalayas have not
achieved the objectives of either speedy disposal or inexpensive justice for the poor so
far but can still succeed if concrete, well planned and continuous efforts are made. The
Committee, therefore, suggests that the recommendations of the National Productivity
Council for preparation of detailed operational guidelines, enhanced central assistance
and improved monitoring mechanisms should be implemented immediately. The
Committee also reiterates its recommendation that the Department should explore a tri-
partite model so that expertise of the Department could also be utilized in establishing
Gram Nyayalayas. [Para 6.37]
29. The Committee appreciates the new initiatives of Nyaya Mitra Programme, Tele
Law Project and Pro Bono Legal Service Scheme launched by the Government to
improve access to justice and feels that all the three schemes are conceptually strong. As
these initiatives are presently at a nascent stage, their true potential would only be
known in the coming times. However, the Committee recommends that the Government
should take all necessary steps, including providing adequate financial backing, to make
these schemes successful on the ground level. [Para 6.45]
NON- SCHEME ALLOCATIONS
30. The Committee observes that the Academy has been in existence for more than
two decades now and substantial amount of public fund has already been spent on it. It
would, therefore, be useful for the Department to get a third party evaluation made of
the quality of training being imparted at the Academy and the extent to which training
at the Academy has resulted in strengthening the judicial system, so that shortcomings,
if any, could be removed. [Para 6.53]
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
101
31. As per the Two Hundred and Sixty Eight Report of the Law Commission, 67 per
cent of India’s prison inmates are undertrial prisoners, who are presumable innocent
according to law. A majority of them (70.60 per cent) are illiterate or semiliterate and
belong to socio-economically marginalised groups. This has led to overcrowding of
prisons and violation of basic rights of prisoners. The Committee has been apprised of
the various measures being taken/proposed to taken by NALSA for undertrial prisoners
and convicts in jails, which include establishment of Legal Services Clinics in about
1070 jails to provide effective legal services, appointment of 9563 remand advocates,
working with undertrial Review Committees for release of prisoners who are entitled to
statutory bails, etc. Legal aid is a Constitutional imperative under Articles 14, 21 and 39
(A) of the Constitution of India. More so, Legal Services Act, 1987 has been enacted
with a view to provide legal aid and services to the indignant and vulnerable sections of
the society and promote legal awareness amongst them. To the query of the Committee
about the non-availability of Legal Services Clinics in certain jails, the Committee was
informed that 1070 Legal Services Clinics have been established various jails across the
country and in 168 jails it is yet to be established. The Committee is pained to note that
even after 30 years of the enactment of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, NALSA
has not be able to establish Legal Service Clinics in all the jails of the Country. The
Conditions of jails is the country is pitiable with overcrowding, lack of healthcare
facility etc. In many cases prisoners with petty criminal charges are made to stay with
hardened criminals, leading to the making of potential criminals in future. There must
be segregation of criminals based on the nature of charges against them and under-trial
prisoners who have served fifty-percent of their term should be released as per Section
436A of the CrPC. However, it is constrained to note that the Constitutional
commitment to provide legal aid services from the time the accused is produced before
the Magistrate for the first time and thereafter each time he/she is produced for
remand, is not being fulfilled. The experience at the ground level is that the accused do
not get representation from the time of first remand as claimed by NALSA. It is usually
at a much later stage and in many cases at the time of evidence. By that time it is too
late to protect the rights of the accused. Also, there are issues of insufficient briefing and
instructions to the panel lawyers, as well as non-availability of translated material, etc.
that comes in the way of cause of justice for these people. [Para 6.71]
32. The Committee, therefore, recommends that NALSA should re-examine the
ground realities and take all necessary measures, like establishment of Legal Services
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
102
Clinics in all the jails, appointment of adequate number of remand advocates, working
with under trial Review Committees in close coordination, to ensure that the
constitutional rights of these prisoners are protected from the stage of first remand
itself and the prisons are decongested. [Para 6.72]
33. In most cases lawyers without much experience are empanelled who do not
understand the complexity of the crime. Also, in most cases the prisoners are unaware
of who is representing them and at what stage their case is. The Committee had
expressed displeasure over the quality of lawyers empanelled for providing legal aid in
its Ninety-first Report also. NALSA has informed that various steps are being taken to
appoint competent lawyers, including proposed amendment to the NALSA Free and
Competent Legal Services Regulations, 2010. The Committee also notes that the fee of the
panel lawyers has been recently enhanced by all SLSAs. It is a welcome step but the
Committee feels that it still may not be lucrative enough to attract talented lawyers. The
Committee feels that a lot more still needs to be done to attract talented lawyers and,
therefore, recommends that NALSA should take proactive measures to ensure that only
competent lawyers are appointed on the panel. The Committee also suggests that the
performance of the lawyers already on the panel should be reviewed periodically for
improved results. [Para 6.73]
34. The Committee notes that the projected demand of NALSA has been curtailed
by ₹ 60 crore, which may affect its working during the current financial year.
Furthermore, human resource constraints may also have impact on its functioning. The
Constitutional commitment of the State to afford equal opportunity to all to secure
justice may be hampered due to inadequacy of funds or human resource constraints.
The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Government should appropriately
enhance Grants-in-aid made available to the Authority and also take immediate
measures to fill vacant posts so that the activities of NALSA do not suffer. [Para 6.74]
SECOND NATIONAL JUDICIAL PAY COMMISSION (SNJPC)
35. The Committee is happy to note that the Government has constituted the Second
National Judicial Pay Commission to examine the pay/emoluments/service conditions of
subordinate judiciary in the country. The pay scales of judicial officers are not uniform
across the country. The objective of the Commission for bringing parity amongst the
judges (5927) in subordinate courts of similar rank across the States is laudable. The
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
103
Committee is of the view that the recommendations of the Commission would help in
strengthening subordinate judiciary, thereby promoting judicial efficiency and
administration in the country. [Para 6.76]
VACANCIES AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN SUBORDINATE COURTS
36. The Committee is concerned with the large number of vacancy positions of
judicial officers and judges in subordinate judiciary. As per the data available, at
present 5927 positions of judicial officers are vacant in different States. The Vacancy is
highest in the States of Uttar Pradesh (1348), Bihar (835), Madhya Pradesh (728),
Gujarat (375) and Tamil Nadu (341). Since appointment of subordinate judicial officers
falls under the domain of State Government, the Committee recommends the
Department of Justice to impress upon the State Government to initiate appointment of
judicial officers. The Committee is of the view that recruitment and training of judicial
personnel and supporting staffs at Subordinate Courts may help in reducing the
pendency of cases and the judge-population ratio may be corrected by appointing more
judges in the Subordinate Courts to reduce pendency. The Committee further
recommends the Department to explore the option of creation of All India Judicial
Services to fill-up the vacancies. [Para 6.80]
37. The Committee is pained to note that huge pendency of cases exists in the
Subordinate Judiciary. The pendency is highest in the States of Uttar Pradesh
(6161822), Maharashtra (3336574), West Bengal (1770820), Bihar (1658292) and
Gujarat (1641355).The Committee in its 67th Report on the Infrastructure Development
and Strengthening of Subordinate Courts (2014) expressed its serious concern over the
large number of vacancies existing in the Subordinate Courts and recommended that
vacancies of judicial officers need to be filled-up as both vacancy of judicial officers and
pendency of cases are closely related to each other. The Committee further
recommended that regular conducting of morning/evening, holiday courts, lokadalats,
alternative dispute redressal mechanisms etc., wherever feasible, can help in reducing
the problem of pendency of cases in Subordinate Judiciary. Sincere efforts are also
required on the part of State governments to fill the existing vacancies in the
Subordinate Courts, so that the disposal rate of cases may be enhanced. [Para 6.81]
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
104
VACANCIES AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURTS
38. The Committee is concerned with the large number of vacancies of Judges in
High Courts and also took note of problem in its Eighty-seventh and Ninety-first
Reports. The vacancy of judges in very high in High Courts of Allahabad (56),
Karnataka (38), Calcutta ( 39), Punjab& Haryana (35), Telangana & Andhra Pradesh
(30) and Bombay (24). The Committee notes that the guidelines laid in the Supreme
Court Advocates-on-Record Association and another vs. Union of India (1993), popularly
known as Second Judges Case, for the appointment of judges are not being adhered to
by the High Courts, which is the responsibility of the Supreme Court in its
administrative side to direct the concerned High Courts to initiate the process of filling-
up the vacancies in advance. The Committee is of the view that to reduce pendency of
cases, the existing vacancy positions of judges need to be filled up immediately and the
vacancies arising in future should be filled strictly as per the guidelines in the Second
Judges Case. The Committee in its Eighty-seventh Report on “Inordinate Delay in
Filling up the Vacancies in the Supreme Court and High Courts” recommended for
raising the age of retirement of Supreme Court judges to 67 years and of High Court
judges to 65 years. The Committee again reiterates its recommendation as it feels that it
would help in retaining the existing judges, which in turn would help in reducing both
vacancy and pendency of cases in the short run. [Para 6.86]
SCHEDULED LANGUAGES IN HIGHER JUDICIARY
39. The Committee has examined the above issue in its earlier Reports also, viz.
Seventy-fifth and Eighty-fourth Reports on the Demands for Grants (2015-16 & 2016-
17), and had observed that Article 348 provides for the use of Official language of the
State, other than English, with the consent of the Governor of the State in the High
Court of that State. The Committee had, accordingly, recommended that official
languages of the State other than English may be permitted to be used in the High
Courts, provided it is demanded by the concerned State Government. The Committee
was further of the view that the consultation process with judiciary is not required as
the Constitutional provisions are amply clear on the use of Scheduled Languages in the
High Courts and accordingly, the use of official languages should be decided as per the
mandate of Article 348. The Committee reiterates its above recommendations.
[Para 6.89]
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
105
REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IN JUDICIARY
40. Since Independence, only 6 women judges have been appointed in the Supreme
Court of India, first being in 1989. The Committee, accordingly, desires that the Bench
of Higher Judiciary be reflective of composition of the society and its diversity and
recommends that suitable measures be taken to include more and more Women judges
in both Higher and Subordinate Judiciary. Certain States like Bihar (35 percent),
Andhra Pradesh (33.33) Odisha (33.33), Telangana (33.33, Assam (30 percent),
Rajasthan (30 percent) Tamil Nadu (30 percent), Karnataka (30 percent), Uttrakhand
(30), Uttar Pradesh (20 percent) and Jharkhand (5 percent) have introduced reservation
for women in subordinate judiciary. The Committee is further of the view that quota of
supernumerary (over and above the actual intake) as done in the case of Indian Institute
of Technology may be replicated in the admission of five year law programmes,
particularly in the National Law Universities. The Committee reiterates the
recommendation in its Eighty-fourth Report on the Demands for Grants (2016-17) that
the strength of women judges should be around 50 percent of the total strength of the
judges. The Committee desires that the Department should request the State
Governments to introduce quota for women in Law Universities and subordinate
judiciary recruitment. [Para 6.92]
CHAPTER – VII
41. The Committee notes that out of 251 crores in BE (2018-19), which is a
decrease of 4 crore against RE (2017-18), 40 lakh is proposed under the head
‘Publication’. The Committee also notes that the Supreme Court has not been able to
spend funds allotted to it under the head ‘Publication’ in BE (2016-17), as only 14.94
lakh were spent out of the allocation of 20 lakh under the said head. As per the
Official Languages Act, 1963, every Government department is required to publish
documents in Hindi version, along with English. The Committee accordingly adjures
the Registrar, Supreme Court of India to publish report in Hindi. [Para 7.2]
- - - - -
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)