I
am grateful for the opportunity to attend this
seminar on the theme of reforms in our judicial system. It is common
knowledge that the root causes for the high pendency levels are the chronic
shortage of judicial officers as well as inadequate budgetary
allocations. While the erstwhile colonial government may have
deliberately understaffed and under-funded the judicial branch,
the problem of a low ‘judge-population’ ratio has unfortunately persisted till
the present times. In recent years, the disposal rates of judicial
officers have actually been improving with each passing year but the rate of institution
of fresh proceedings is far100
higher. This is but natural in a society where millions of individuals are
gradually emerging from the clutches of poverty,120 illiteracy and status-based discrimination.
With a more egalitarian socio-economic order, more and more
people will gain the capacity and140
the confidence to approach the judicial system. In this sense, we must
recognise that a strong and efficient judicial system160 is not only a pre-requisite for
enabling social justice but also a public service which will be
increasingly demanded by more citizens.
While
the existing pendency figures may be a cause for worry by themselves, we must
prepare for a far200 bigger
‘docket explosion’ in the future. The onus is on us to improve access to
justice for those sections of society who were excluded in the past. Hence, our
agenda for judicial reforms should not only focus on reducing the240 existing pendency and arrears, but it
should also account for the incremental challenges that await us in
the years to come. The comparison between judicial statistics from
different States also shows that the litigation rates in various States do not280 bear a consistent correlation with
their respective population. This means that in some States, a
larger proportion of the population300
has been approaching the Courts as compared to that of other States. What is
especially worrying is the immense disparity320 between the number of civil and criminal
cases instituted in backward and insurgency-hit areas. A perusal of the
pendency figures indicates that while there are more civil cases filed
in developed areas, the reliance on the civil justice system is360 shockingly low in States such as
Bihar, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Jammu and Kashmir as well
as the North-Eastern States. This disturbing trend could have two
explanations. One is that the number of courts is grossly inadequate,
and the other explanation is400
that ordinary citizens are consciously not bringing their civil disputes
before the judicial system. If the second of these explanations420 holds good, then it calls for targeted
interventions. We must keep an open mind in addressing these issues. In order
to make effective interventions, there might be a need to depart from
some well-established practices and opt for radical changes in our
judicial system. While the judiciary enjoys an exalted status in the opinion of
the public, there must also480
be a willingness to change with the times.
The
first and foremost requirement is that of progressively increasing the
number500 of judges,
especially at the subordinate level. Unfortunately, it is perceived
in many quarters that it is only those who are unable to build a
practice of their own, who appear for the judicial services
examinations. There must be some pro-active measures taken to
change this perception. The prevailing system for recruiting judicial officers needs
to560 be overhauled
in order to attract the best available talent. Apart from improving pay-scales
and service conditions, there must also be a commensurate
improvement of prospects for career advancement. However, it has been
argued in some quarters that the recruitment process in most States600 is itself quite lengthy and cumbersome,
thereby leading to the piling up of vacancies. It must be highlighted
here that an elaborate selection process is necessary to ensure that only
competent and suitable persons join the judiciary. The recruitment process640 is coordinated by the respective High
Courts and the State Public Service Commissions who are responsible
for conducting the written examinations and interviews. Hence, there are always
bound to be some vacancies on account of the time needed to conduct
a thorough evaluation of the candidates, but nevertheless efforts must
be made to keep the vacancies within proper limits. There700 is, of course, scope for improving the
examination process by incorporating problem-based questions that test the
candidates’ analytical and communication720
skills. Some High Courts have also taken the initiative of organising pre-appointment
training for selected candidates in order to equip them with necessary skills
such as research, judgment writing and case management. In this regard,
we must wholeheartedly support the activities of the National Judicial
Academy and the various State Judicial Academies that organise periodic
training programmes for serving judicial officers. It is only through
constant upgradation of knowledge, that our judicial officers will be able
to tackle800 the
challenges before them.
Another
proposal for improving the quality of subordinate courts is the creation
of an All India Judicial Service. This would entail the formation of an All India
cadre for officers appointed at the rank of Additional840 District Judge. The recruitment
would be through a national-level examination and it is suggested that
up to 25 per cent of the officers in each State could be drawn from this
All-India cadre. However, this proposal has faced some criticism since there
are apprehensions that individuals belonging to one State may face language
problems when they are posted to900
another state. This can be addressed by factoring in the candidate’s
language skills while deciding on the location of their assignment. The
main objective is to ensure a degree of uniformity in the examination
process.
An
important measure taken for expanding the subordinate judiciary is the creation
of village-level courts. These village-level courts would be manned by
judicial960 officers of a rank
equivalent to a Civil Judge (Junior Division) or a Judicial Magistrate First
Class. It has been980
estimated that nearly 4,000 judicial officers will be needed in order to
implement this scheme. I must also lay1000
stress on the fact that these officers will be chosen through the
regular judicial services examination conducted by the respective State Governments.
There is tremendous potential in this scheme since the intention is to
reduce the costs that are borne by litigants in approaching courts located
at district-centres. The underlying philosophy is to bring justice to the
doorsteps of rural citizens. The Central Government has already assured financial
assistance to the State Governments for the purpose of establishing
the1080 village-level courts.
Coming
to the High Courts, I must reiterate here that there has been an
upward revision in the sanctioned strength of several High Courts in
recent years. The Central Government has promptly approved of the requests
for increasing1120 the number
of judges at the High-Court level. However, there exists a disparity in the proportion
between the number of High Court judges and the respective population of
different States. This is so because the rate of institution, disposal and
pendency of cases is also taken into account for deciding the strength of the
judges. As far as appointments to the Supreme Court are
concerned, I must say that we are bound by the procedure in
accordance with the Constitution1200
Bench decisions given by our predecessors in 1993 and 1998. The
proper forum for suggesting changes to the appointment process is the
Parliament. It would not be proper for me to enter the debate at this
stage. A vast majority of our Magistrates and Civil Judges work with very
poor infrastructural facilities. Even the District and1260 Sessions Judges face numerous obstacles
in their daily routine on account of poor maintenance of court
complexes. While the progressive1280
expansion of the judiciary should be supported, there is also a
compelling need to ensure the proper maintenance of the existing courts. This
calls for consistent financial commitments from the respective State Governments.
Independent studies have shown that the budgetary allocations for the judiciary
form a very small portion of the aggregate public expenditure. Some
commentators have suggested that the picture will drastically improve even if a
large portion of the Court-fees that is collected at different levels is
re-invested into the judicial system. It must be recognised that
expenditure directed at the judicial system will help in preventing the
long-term costs associated with1400
protracted litigation as well as the intangible costs that are
incurred by society on account of unresolved disputes.
Apart
from financial commitments, the judiciary has also been making attempts to
streamline its own administration. One such measure is a comprehensive1440 system for compiling reliable
statistics on the institution, disposal and pendency of cases at all levels.
The National Informatics Centre has implemented a computerised system
for compiling this data from the Supreme Court and the various High Courts which
are also responsible for collecting data from the subordinate courts lying in
their respective territorial jurisdictions. These statistics are
compiled on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis with a clear
indication of various subject categories. The availability of accurate and
reliable judicial statistics is of course a necessity to implement the
proposed ‘National Arrears Grid’. It is important for judges,
administrative staff as well as policy-makers to study the statistics at length
for identifying the root causes behind pendency in particular areas. Of
particular note, is the implementation of the E-Courts project under
which thousands of judicial officers have been equipped with computer
facilities. Information Technology tools are being progressively used in
the administration of justice, especially for purposes such as1600 notification of cause-lists
as well as the publication of orders and judgments on court websites.
