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 are the chronic shortage of judicial
officers as well as inadequate budgetary allocations. While the erstwhile
colonial government may have deliberately understaffed and underfunded
the judicial branch, the problem of a low ‘judge to 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 is100 far higher. This is but natural in a
society where millions of individuals are gradually emerging from the clutches
of120 /// poverty, illiteracy
and status-based discrimination. With a more egalitarian socio-economic
order, more and more people will gain the capacity and the confidence to
approach the judicial system. In this sense, we must recognise that a
strong and efficient judicial system 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 for200 a far 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 on240
/// reducing the 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 not bear a consistent
correlation with their respective population. This means that in some States,
a larger proportion of300 the
population has been approaching the Courts as compared to that of other States.
What is especially worrying is the immense disparity 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 civil360 /// justice system
is very low in States such as Bihar, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Jammu
and Kashmir as well as the North-Eastern States. This trend could
have two explanations – one, that the number of courts is grossly inadequate,
and secondly, that ordinary400
citizens are consciously not bringing their civil disputes
before the judicial system. If the second of these explanations holds
good, then it indeed 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
also be480 /// a willingness
to change with the times.
The
first and foremost requirement is that of increasing the number of judges,500 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 to 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 of the States is600 /// 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 process is640 coordinated by the respective High
Courts and the State Public Service Commissions which 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. There is,700 of course, scope for improving the
examination process by incorporating problem-based questions that test
the candidates’ analytical and communication skills720 /// rather than those of rote
learning. 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 be800 able to tackle 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 rank840 /// of Additional 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 are900 posted to 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.
Coming
to the High Courts, I must reiterate here that there has been an
upward revision in the sanctioned strength of several High960 /// Courts in
recent years. The Central Government has promptly approved of the
requests for increasing the number of judges at the High-Court level. However,
there exists a disparity in the proportion between the number of High Court
judges and1000 the 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 Constitution Bench decisions given by our predecessors
in 1993 and 1998. The proper forum for suggesting changes to the appointment
process is1080 /// the
Parliament. It would not be proper for me to enter the debate at this
stage.
The
next requirement is1100 that
of improving the infrastructure. A vast majority of our Magistrates and Civil
Judges work with very poor infrastructural facilities. Even the District
and Sessions Judges face numerous obstacles in their daily routine on
account of poor maintenance of court complexes. While the progressive
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 public
expenditure.1197
