INDEX [doj.gov.in] · Desk Side 6. Question No.332 Unstarred 25.02.2016 The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges Amendment Bill, 2015 Justice-I 7. Question No.364 Unstarred 25.02.2016

INDEX

S. No. Question No. Question Type

Date Subject Division

1. Question No. *32 Starred 26.02.2016 Judicial Reforms National Mission

2. Question No. 236 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Lok Adalats LAP

3. Question No. 287 Unstarred 26.02.2016 Review of Pending Court Cases National Mission

4. Question No.327 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Free Legal Aid LAP

5. Question No.331 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Appointment of Judges on Contract Basis

Desk Side

6. Question No.332 Unstarred 25.02.2016 The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges Amendment Bill, 2015

Justice-I

7. Question No.364 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Special Courts Justice-II

8. Question No.427 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Out-of-Court Settlement LAP

9. Question No.450 Unstarred 25.02.2016 Mediation Centres LAP

10. Question No. *101 Starred 03.03.2016 Judicial Impact Assessment National Mission

11. Question No. 116 Starred 03.03.2016 Infrastructure for Judiciary National Mission

12. Question No. 1225 Unstarred 03.03.2016 Facilities for Differently-abled Persons

National Mission

13. Question No. 1251 Unstarred 03.03.2016 Mechanism to Deal with Complaints against Judges

National Mission

14. Question No. 1308 Unstarred 03.03.2016 Training to Judicial Officials Justice-I

15. Question No. 1342 Unstarred 03.03.2016 Pending Court Cases National Mission

16. Question No. 1343 Unstarred 03.03.2016 Appointment of Judges Desk Side

17. Question No. 2121 Unstarred 10.03.2016 Incidents of Assaults within Court Premises

Desk Side

18. Question No. 2122 Unstarred 10.03.2016 Model Courts National Mission

19. Question No. 2190 Unstarred 10.03.2016 Use of Audio – Video Recordings

Justice-II (eCourts)

20. Question No. 2225 Unstarred 10.03.2016 Court Fees Justice-II

21. Question No. 797 Unstarred 28.04.2016 Use of Technology eCourts(PMU)

22. Question No. 804 Unstarred 28.04.2016 e-Services in the Judiciary eCourts(PMU)

23. Question No. 848 Unstarred 28.04.2016 Setting up of New Courts Desk Side

24. Question No. 867 Unstarred 28.04.2016 Vacations and Working Hours in the Judiciary

Justice-I

25. Question No. 880 Unstarred 28.04.2016 Use of Hindi Language in Courts Justice-I

26. Question No. 177 Starred 05.05.2016 Fast Track Courts Justice-II

27. Question No. 1963 Unstarred 05.05.2016 Renaming of High Courts

Desk Side

28. Question No. 1940 Unstarred 05.05.2016 Fast Track Court Justice-II

29. Question No. 2032 Unstarred 05.05.2016 Registration with Bar Councils Justice-I

..

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO. *32

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, 25TH FEBRUARY, 2016

Judicial Reforms

*32. SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY:

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

(a) whether the Government proposes to implement judicial reforms In the country; (b) If so, the details thereof and the time by which these reforms are likely to be

implemented; and (c) the details of funds allocated and utilised for the purpose during each of the last three

years and the current year?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI D. V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

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

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) to (c) of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *32 FOR ANSWER ON 25fR FEBRUARY, 2016.

The National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms was set up in August, 2011

with the twin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and

enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and

capacities. The Mission has been pursuing a co-ordinated approach for phased liquidation of

arrears and pendency in judicial administration which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for

courts including computerization, increase in manpower strength of judiciary, suggesting policy

and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, recommending re

engineering of court procedure for quick disposal of cases and emphasis on human resource

development. Infrastructure Development for Subordinate Judiciary and Computerization of

Courts are the major initiatives of the Government for judicial reforms. The Central Government

has provided financial assistance to the tune of Rs. 3,694 crores to State Governments and

Union Territories for upgradation I construction of court complexes and residential units for

judicial officers in the last five years. The eCourts Integrated Mission Mode Project (eCourts

IMMP) is one of the National eGovernance Plan (NeGP) projects, which is being implemented

for the Information & Communication Technology (ICT) enablement I computerisation of the

Supreme Court, 24 High Courts and district & subordinate courts in the country.

Computerization of courts would enable the courts to exercise greater control over management

of cases in the docket. It will also provide designated services to the litigants and the lawyers.

In order to reduce government litigation in courts the Central Government has encouraged the

States to notify their litigation policies which contain provisions for weeding out infructuous cases

and promote dispute resolution through alternative mechanisms.

The legislative initiatives taken by the Government in the recent past include amendments

to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to clarify the jurisdictional issues and provide for

centralization of cases ag~inst the same drawer, amendments to Arbitration and Conciliation

Act, 1996 for time bound conclusion of arbitration proceedings and notification of Commercial

Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Court Act, 2015 for

speedy disposal of high value commercial disputes. Judicial reform is a continuous process.

Details of Budget Estimates and Actual Expenditure of Plan Schemes of the Department

of Justice for the years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and the current financial year (2015-16) are

given in the Statement Annexed.

****************

Annexure Annexure referred to in Statement laid on the Table of the House in relation to repfy to Lok Sabha Starred Question No.*32 for answer on 25.02.2016

Details of Budget Estimates and Actual Expenditure of Plan Schemes of Department of Justice during years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and the current financial vear (2015-16) ~ Rs. in Crores)

SI. Name of the Scheme I Sub- 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 No. Scheme I Component Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Estimates Expenditure Estimates Expenditure Estimates Expenditure Estimates Expenditure upto 23.02.2016

1. Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) 660.00 708.2078 911.00 895.00 935.99 933.00 562.99 562.99 for development of infrastructure faciltties for judiciary

2. Computerization of District and 233.66 72.97 118.00 38.90 58.00 9.95 2.00 2.00 Subordinate Courts (Phase -1)

3. E-Courts Mission Mode Project (Phase 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60.00 0.00 227.13 201.24 -Ill

4. Scheme of Assistance to State 114.00 4.10 25.00 5.00 0.01 3.00 0.01 0.00 Governments for Establishing · and On<>ratina Gram Nvavalavas

5. Access to Justice - Government of 5.00 0.00 8.00 0.56 8.00 3.18 7.00 2.06 India INEJKl

6. Access to Justice IUNDPl ISAJ!l 4.84 2.4461 5.00 1.19 5.00 7.14 5.00 4.30 7. Action Research and Studies on 4.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 5.00 0.09 2.50 0.35

Judicial Reforms 8. National Mission - Action Plan 20.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.00

Implementation 9. Settino uo of Model Court 7.50 0.00 26.00 0.0145 26.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Total 1050.00 787.7239 1103.00 940.6645 1103.00 956.36 806.65 772.94

****************AAAAAAAA**

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND .JUSTICE


******

LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 236

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY, 2016

Lok Adalats ·[236. SHRI SADASHIV LOKI-IANDE:

SHIU VENKATESH BABU T.G.:


(a) the number of various Lok Adalats organised during each of the last three years and the C\l!Tent year in the country, State/ UT-wise;

(b) the number of cases disposed off by these Adalats during the said period, State/UT-wise;

( c) whether the Goverrunent proposes to organise more such Ad ala ts on regular basis in future and if so, the details thereof;

( d) the extent to which these Lok Adalats have helped in reducing the number of pending comt cases in the country; and

( e) the steps taken/being taken by the Goverrunent to organise such Ad ala ts more frequently across the country?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI D.V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

(a) & (b) A statement showing the number of Lok Adalats organised in various States and number of cases disposed of (the number of cases includes both pre-litigation and postlitigation cases) by these Adalats during the last three calendar years is at Am1exure-I. The details of National Lok Adalats organised during the last three years are given at Annexure-II.

(c), (d) and (e) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) organizes Lok Adalats tln·ough the State Legal Services Authority, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committees, District Legal Services Authorities and Taluk Legal Services Co1mnittees for settlement of a large number of cases, both at pre-litigation and postlitigation stages. In order to reduce the pendency of cases in comts, the Legal Services Institutions under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, have been organizing Lok

Adalats all over the country regularly either on a daily, fmtnightly or monthly basis in addition to the National and Mega Lok Adalats.

The National Lok Adalats on various subject matters, such as, bank matters/Section 138 of the NI Act, revenue/MNREGA/Land acquisition cases, Labour and family matters, MACT and insurance claims/electricity/Water/telephone/public utility disputes, criminal compoundable matters, traffic/petty matters, municipal matters are being organized during the year 2016, as per the Calendar approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India and Patron-in-Chief, NALSA and Hon'ble Executive Chairman, NALSA. The main aim of organizing Lok Adalats is to provide an opportunity to settle disputes within a short period. The State Legal Services Authorities have been issued guidelines/directions by NALSA vide National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulations, 2009 to organize Lok Adalats more effectively and for speedy disposal of cases.

***

Annexure- I -STATEMENT AS REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) AND (b) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 236 FOR 25.02.2016 REGARDING LOK ADALATS

Statewise number of Lok Adalats organised and number of cases disposed of by these Lok Adalats during the last three calander years 2013, 2014 and 20 15.

S.No Name of the State 2013 2014 2015 Authorities

No.of Total No.of Total No. of Total Lok number of Lok number of Lok number of

Adalats Cases Adalats cases Ada lats Cases held Settled held Settled held Settled

I Andhra Pradesh 14,690 2,12,933 11,956 1,40,634 10,754 1,83,665

2 Arunachal Pradesh 34 624 20 544 40 329

3 Assam 52 62, 114 40 98,470 89 60,476

4 Bihar 2,209 42,410 1,217 1,67,686 1,980 3,93, 196

5 Chhattisgarh 2,039 7,68,845 2,162 41,54,932 2,109 15,23,657

6 Goa 123 654 84 2,905 155 4,173

7 Guiarat 10,973 2,23,270 I 1,839 3,74,241 13,128 1,72,363

8 Haiyana 3,169 1,94,594 62,306 2,46,538 65,451 2,01,056

9 Himachal Pradesh 732 25,995 2,296 1,10,244 1,472 1,03,809

10 Jammu & Kashmir 597 63,659 499 1,32,044 602 1,08,792

I I Jharkhand 1,360 1,44,989 4,079 42,60,524 3,382 7,86,845

12 Karnataka 18,788 1,73,226 35,017 I 1,98,043 21 ,514 16,86,496

13 Kerala 4,616 44,455 4,495 1,27,625 3,329 1,38,402

14 Madhva Pradesh 1,683 20,52,228 1,517 43,25,522 1,237 26,18,017

15 Maharashtra 2,279 4,38,018 2,614 4,06,945 3,764 3,23,833

16 Manipur 16 932 6 322 11 1,667

17 Meghalaya 23 1,000 36 1,854 74 2,888

18 Mizoram 43 402 IOI 619 67 725

19 Nagaland 27 1,737 31 1,324 74 1,209

20 Odisha 1,054 3,74,443 I, I 13 1,09,445 1,469 1,75,443

21 Punjab 3,388 3,67,160 3,249 2,59,530 4,191 12,38,597

22 Raiasthan 25,804 3,20,058 21,593 3,63,485 18,441 3,61,896

23 Sikkim 239 1,152 371 775 262 796

24 Tamil Nadu 5,733 14,59,974 5,613 40,58,694 4,020 I I ,53,839

25 Telangana - - 3,381 1,52,238 5,899 2,11,588

26 Tripura 225 26,435 252 35,932 346 52,524

27 Uttar Pradesh 3,692 16,61,425 2,600 34,46,277 1,450 I 1,99,069

28 Uttarakhand 180 55,797 172 22,810 220 30,109

29 West Bengal 1,564 4,03,009 1,501 5,45,096 1,716 3,43,773

Andaman and Nicobar 30 Islands 8 2,048 7 2,382 7 127

31 U.T. Chandigarh 804 79,459 719 3,43,838 967 16,656 Dadra and Nagar

32 Have Ii 2 117 1 64 JO 193

33 Daman and Diu 6 1,654 4 146 9 119

34 Delhi 1,200 4,09,541 1,097 1,27,415 925 1,35,728 .

35 Lakshadweep 68 0 13 0 - 0

36 Puduche•TY 102 19,130 107 7,231 106 5,711

TOTAL 107,522 9,633,487 182,108 25,226,374 1,69,270 1,32,37,766

Annexure- II

REPLY TO PARTS (a) and (b) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.236 FOR 25.02.20!6 REGARDING LOK ADALATS

S.No. Date on which National Lok Adalats Number of cases disposed of in (NLA) organised National Lok Adalats (both pre-

litigation and post-litigation cases)

I $ lstNLA on 23.11.2013 72,10,344 2 # 2ndNLA on 6& 13.12.2014 4,49, 17,663 3 * 14.02.2015 4,20,665 4 * 14.03.2015 41,92,313 5 * 11.04.20 l 5 5,31,872 6 * 09.05.2015 & 13.06.2015 3,18,724 7 * l l.07.2015 8,68,254 8 *08.08.2015 3,53,167 9 *12.09.2015 5,71,741 IO *I 0.10.20 I 5 16,39,229 l 1 12.12.2015 (All types of cases) l ,34,56, l 27 !2 *!3.02.2016 2,75,926

---·-

Note:- * NLA on various subjects matters

$ In the I'' National Lok Adalat held on 23. l l.2015 in all States/UTs and in the Supreme Cotlli, the total of72,I0,344 cases were settled, out of which !0,77,582 Criminal cases, 2 l ,22,950 Pre-Litigation cases, 9, 19,73 l Revenue Cases, 5,22,424 Traffic Challans, 4, l 6, 782 MNREGA cases, and 2 l ,50,875 cases relating to other categories.

# In the 2"d National Lok Adalat held on 06.12.20 l 4 & 13. l 2.2014 in all 36 States/UTs and in the Supreme Comt on 06.12.2014, a total of 4,49, l 7,663 cases were settled, out of which 40,81,637 cases were pending in Cou1ts. The remaining break up of 4,08,36,026 cases have been - 1,30,04,343 cases at Pre-Litigative stage; 26,44,87! MNREGA cases and 2,5 l ,86,812 cases relating to AadharNoter/Ration/BPL cards.



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY, 2016

Review of Pending Court Cases

287. SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:


(a) whether the State Governments and High Courts have been asked to review pending court cases and set up committees to suggest withdrawal of such cases;

(b) if so, the details thereof; (c) the details of States which have set up such committees and have started the

process of withdrawing cases; (d) the number of cases withdrawn as a result thereof, State I UT -wise; and (e) the other steps taken I being taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): State Governments have framed their State Litigation Policies. Most of the

States have indicated in the State Litigation Policy that a review will be undertaken of the

existing cases and wherever necessary frivolous and vexatious cases would be withdrawn.

The details about cases withdrawn by the State Governments are not maintained centrally.

The Chief Justices' Conference held on 03rd and 04th April 2015 has resolved that

each High, Court shall establish an Arrears Committee to clear the backlog of cases

pending for more than five years. As per information available, Arrears Committees have

been set up in the High Courts of (i) Allahabad, (ii) Bombay, (iii) Calcutta, (iv) Chhattisgarh,

(v) Delhi, (vj) Himachal Pradesh, (vii) Jammu & Kashmir, (viii) Jharkhand, (ix) Kerala, (x)

Madhya Pradesh, (xi) Manipur, (xii) Meghalaya, (xiii) Orissa, (xiv) Punjab & Haryana, (xv)

Sikkim, (xvi) Tripura, and (xvii) Uttarakhand.

*****************



******

LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 251H FEBRUARY, 2016

Free Legal Aid 327. MOHAMMED F AIZAL:

SHRI DUSHY ANT CHA UT ALA: SHRI R. PARTHIPAN:

ADV. JOICE GEORGE:


(a) the details of authorities/institutions involved in providing free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the society in the country;

(b) whether the Government proposes to strengthen these authorities/institutions including the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and if so, the details thereof;

(c) the details of funds allocated, released and utilised by these authorities/institutions including NALSA during each of the last three years and the current year, State/UT-wise;

(d) whether the Govenunent has any mechanism to monitor the functioning/performance of these authorities/institutions including NALSA and to ensure proper utilisation of fonds so allocated and for better and effective implementation of various programmes so as to help the end users specially the undertrial piisoners, victims of sexual harassment/natural calamities; and

( e) if so, the details thereof and if not, the other steps taken/being taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI D.V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

(a) & (b) The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 has set up legal services institutions at all levels from the level of Taluk Courts to the Supreme Comt to provide free legal services to the persons eligible under Section 12 of the Act. These include the National Legal Services Authority, the Supreme Court Legal Services Conunittee, the High Court Legal Services Committees, the State Legal Services Authorities, the District Legal Services Authorities and

the Taluka Legal Services Committees. Free legal services include payment of court fees, providing advocate and preparation of paper work, etc.

The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) has notified National Legal Services

Authority (Free and Competent Legal Services) Regulations, 2010 which provide free legal aid to the aforesaid poor and weaker section of the society such as members of SC/ST, women, children etc. Advocates, panel lawyers for legal aid cases are appointed at al! levels including in the High Courts and Supreme Court by the Legal Services Institutions for prosecuting or defending the Court cases on behalf of all persons who are eligible for Legal Services.

(c) National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) receives its funds from the Government oflndia

(Ministry of Law & Justice) for undertaking various legal services activities under Section 4 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Funds allocated to NALSA during the last three years i.e. 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and the current financial year 2015-16 are as under:

ffis. in lakh) S.No. Year Funds allocated Funds utilized

1 2012-13 3900.00 3692.61 2 2013-14 8044.46 6041.69 3 2014-15 8265.42 5601.70 4 2015-16 6797.00 6065.61

A statement showing State-wise details of funds provided by NALSA to State Legal Services Authorities is at Annexure-A.

(d) & ( e) Yes, Madam. The implementation of Legal Services Schemes and also proper utilization of fund are being discussed and evaluated in the All India Meet/Conference being

organized with State Authorities from tin1e to time. The State Authorities have been requested to take steps to ensure that the funds are utilized properly and timely submission of audited statement of accounts and Utilization Certificates submitted in respect of funds utilized.

Further, the NALSA (Free and Competent Leg~! Services) Regulations, 2010, the NALSA (Victims of Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation)Scheme, 2015 and the Scheme for Legal Services to Disaster Victims through Legal Services Authorities framed by NALSA provide for free legal assistance to the poor and also undertrial prisoners, victims of sexual harassment/natural calamities, etc.

*****



LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.331

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25.02.2016

Appointment of Judges on Contract Basis

t33 l. SHRI ARV!ND SAW ANT :


(a) whether the Government proposes to take the services of retired judges or appoint the judges on ad hoc/contract basis in view of huge number of cases pending in courts;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) the time by which it is likely to be implemented?

(a) No, Madam.

(b) & (c) Do not arise.

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE

(SHRI D.V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

***



LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION N0.332

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25th FEBRUARY, 2016

The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges Amendment Bill, 2015

332. SHRI B.N CHANDRAPPA:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICEbe pleased to state:

(a) the present status of The High Court and The Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Condtions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2015 as passed by LokSabha on 7 December, 2015;

(b) the objectives of the said Bill;

(c) the time by which the said bill is likely to be implemented; and

(d) whether the objective of One Rank One Pension for Judges is also addressed in the said Bill and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) to (d): The Hon'ble Supreme Court had, inte1~alia, allowed the prayerin a Writ

Petition (Civil) No.521/2002 titled as P. RamakrishnamRajuVs Union of India &

Others vide judgment dated the 31st March, 2014 directing that "for pensionary

benefits, ten years practice as an advocate be added as qualifying service for

Judges elevated from the Bar with effect from the 1st April, 2004, the date on which

section 13A was inserted by the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries

and Conditions of Service) Amendment Act, 2005 (46 of 2005)." In view of the

above order, Government had approved appropriate amendment to the High Court

Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954.

.. ..... 21-

2

With the passage of time, certain provisions in the High Court Judges

(Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1954 as well as in the Supreme

Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act, 1958 have become

spent and outdated. A review had been undertaken and it was decided to

remove the same for clarity by amending the aforesaid Acts. Some of the

provisions relating to determination of leave allowances of judges in both the

Acts needed to be simplified.

The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and

Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2015, as passed by the LokSabha

on 07.12.2015, will be moved. in the RajyaSabha for its consideration and

passing during the current Session of Parliament. The Bill does not envisage

One Rank One Pension for Judges. The provisions of the Bill will be

implemented once the Bill is passed by the RajyaSabhaalso and assented

to by the President of India.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 364

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25Ttt FEBRUARY, 2016

SPECIAL COURTS

364. SHRU D.K. SURESH:

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

(a) the details of funds allocated/released for setting up of special

courts in the country during each of the last three years and the

current year along with the utilization status thereof, State/UT-wise;

(b) the number of such courts set up during the said period,

State/UT-wise including Karnataka;

(c) whether the Government has reviewed the performance of such

courts in the country and if so, the details and the outcome thereof;

(d) whether these courts have been successful in achieving their

objectives and if so, the details thereof; and

(e) whether the judiciary is facing financial crunch and if so, the

details thereof and if not, the steps taken to ensure availability of

adequate funds and optimum utilisation thereof so as to bring down

the huge number of court cases pending in various courts in the

country?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE

(SHRI D.V. SADAN.ANDA GOWDA).

(a)to (e) : Setting up and functioning of special courts is within the

domain of the State Governments and High Courts. Funds are

provided by State Governments for setting up and maintenance of

these courts. Under Article 247 of the Constitution, the Parliament

has the power to provide by law for establishment of any additional

courts for the better administration of laws made by Parliament or of

any existing laws with respect to a matter enumerated in the Union

List. However, in few cases such as Family Courts, Central

Government has provided funds to State Governments. Details of

funds released to Family Courts during last three years and the

current year are given below:

Name of State Year Amount released UC received UC Awaited under Non-Plan (Rs. In lakh) (Rs. In lakh)

. (Rs. In lakh)

Bihar 2013-14 500 830 -2015·16 310 310 .

Chhattisgarh 2014-15 100 . 100 Tripura 2012-13 75.00 44.88 30.12 Uttar Pradesh 2014-15 375 . 375



******

LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25TH .FEBRUARY, 2016

Out-of-Co111·t Settlement

427. SHRJ P.R. SUNDARAM:


(a) whether the Government proposes to encourage pre-litigation and out··Of-court settlements in order to reduce the number of court cases;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether the Government has conducted any study to assess the number of court cases likely to unburden the judiciary as a result thereof;

( d) if so, the details and the outcome thereof; and

( e) the other steps taken/being taken by the Government in this regard?


(a) & (b) Yes, Madam. National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) organizes Lok Adalats throt1gh the State Legal Services Authorities, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Comt Legal Services Connnittees, District Legal Services Authorities and Taluk Legal Services Committees for settlement of a large number of cases, both at pre-litigation and post-litigation stages. In order to reduce the pendency of cases in courts, the Legal Services Institutions under the Legal services Authorities Act, 1987, organize Lok Adalats all over the country regularly either on a daily, weekly, fottnightly or monthly basis in addition to the National and Mega Lok Adalats. A statement showing the details of cases settled in pre-litigation stage in Lok Adalats organized on various subject matters during the year 2015 is at Annexure-A.

(c) & (d) No, Madam. However, as indicated at Annexure A, National Lok Adalats disposed of 1.62 lakh cases at pre litigation stage, many of which may have otherwise gone to regular comis and further burdened the judiciary.

(e) The National Lok Adalats on various subject matters, such as, bank matters/Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, revenue/ MNREGA/Land acquisition cases, Labour and family matters, MACT and insurance claims/electricity/ water/telephone/public utility disputes, criminal compoundable matters, traffic/petty matters, municipal matters are being organized as per the Calendar approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India and patron-in-Chief, NALSA and Hon'ble Executive Chairman, NALSA. The State Legal Services Authorities have been issued guidelines/ directions by the NALSA vide National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalats) Regulations, 2009 to organise Lok Adalats more effectively and for speedy disposal of cases.

Annexure-A

STATEMENT AS REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) & (b) OF THE LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 427 FOR 25.02.2016 REGARDING OUT-OF-

COURT SETTLEMENT. A Statement showing the details of cases settled at pre-litigation stage in National Lok Adalats organized on various subject matters during the year 2015 S.No. Date Subject Disposal at Pre-

litigation stage

1 14.02.2015 Banking Matters & U/s 138 Negotiable 2,59,760 Instruments Act

2 14.03.2015 Revenue, MNREGA, Land Acquisition etc. 34,59,406 3 11.04.2015 Labour & Family 3,70,532 4 09.05.2015 MACT and Insurance Claims 1,60,601

& 13.06.2015

5 11.07.2015 Electricity/Water/Telephone/Public Utility dispute 7,16,026 6 08.08.2015 Banking Matters & U/s 138 Negotiable 2,45,619

Instruments Act 7 12.09.2015 Criminal Compoundable Matters ' 2,99,023 8 10.10.2015 Traffic/Petty matte4rs, Municipal matters 11,18,983 9 12.12.2015 All types of cases 95,89,784

Grand Total 1,62,19,734



******

LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 25T11 FEBRUARY,2016

Mediation Centres

·j·450. SHRI LAKHAN LAL SAHU:


(a) the number of Mediation Centres and Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR) centres set up in the country along with the objectives thereof, State/UT-wise;

(b) the details. of funds allocated and spent thereon during each of the last three years and the current year, State/UT-wise;

(c) the number of cases disposed of by these centres during the said period, State/UT-wise including Chhattisgarh; and

(d) the number of such centres which are approved and yet to be set up in the country, State/UT-wise along with the timeframe set for the purpose?


(a) to (d) The information is being collected and shall be laid on the Table of the House.

***



LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO. *101

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, 03Ro MARCH, 2016

Judicial Impact Assessment

*101. SHRIMATI DARSHANA VIKRAM JARDOSH:


(a) whether any Task. Force I Committee constituted to study "Judicial Impact Assessment" in the country;

(b) if so, the terms of reference and the composition of such Task Force;

(c) the major recommendations made by the Task Force; and (d) the follow-up action taken thereon?

ANSWER


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

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) to (d) of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *101 FOR ANSWER ON 03'a March, 2016.

A Task Force on 'Judicial Impact Assessment' was constituted by the Government on the directions of the Supreme Court of India in the matter of Salem Advocates Bar Association versus Union of India.

The Composition of the Task Force was as follows: 1. Justice M. Jagannadha Rao (Retd.), former

Judge of the Supreme Court and formerly Chairman, Law Commission of India.

2. Prof. (Dr.) N. R. Madhava Menon, former Director of the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal.

3. Prof. (Dr.) Mohan Gopal, Director of the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal.

4. Shri T.C.A. Anant, Member-Secretary of Indian Council of Social Science Research.

5. Dr. B. A. Agarwal, Additional Secretary in Legislative Department.

Chairman

Member

Member

Member

Member - Secretary

The Task Force was appointed with following Terms of Reference:

(i) to suggest the methodology to assess the likely impact of legislation on the courts and also an appropriate framework so that every Bill introduced in Parliament be accompanied by a Judicial Impact Assessment;

(ii) to suggest ways and means of preparation of Judicial Impact Assessment;

(iii) to make an assessment of financial requirements so that the Financial Memorandum attached to each Bill reflects the budgetary requirements for meeting the expenses of additional cases (civil and criminal) which may arise in case the Bill is passed by the Legislature;

(iv)to recommend the content for initiating a training program for laying down the foundation for the expertise to prepare Judicial Impact Assessment; and

(v) to suggest any other measures for assessing the increase of the work load on the courts on passing of a new legislation.

The Task Force submitted its report on 15th June, 2008, which was placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

The Task Force has, inter-alia, recommended that 'Judicial Impact Assessment' must be made on scientific basis for the purpose of estimating the extra case-loacj which any new Bill or Legislation may add to the Judicial System. The expenditure required for adjudication of cases be estimated by the Government and adequate budgetary provisions be made for the purpose. Such impact assessment needs to be made in respect of Bills which are introduced in Parliament as well as Bills introduced in the State legislatures. The Government of India, in view of Entry-11A of the

Concurrent List and Article 247 of Constitution of India and the general scheme of the Constitution, must have such prior assessments made and make necessary financial provision, at the stage of the enactment I introduction of Bills, for implementation of Central Laws in respect of subjects in the Union List or the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. The State Governments should not be made to bear the financial burden of implementing Central laws passed under the Union List or Concurrent List by the Courts established by Governments in the States. The State Governments should be required to make adequate provision for meeting the expenditure of the Courts, at the stage of the Bills, for the implementation of the Laws made by the State Legislature with respect to subjects in the State List and Concurrent List.

The views of the State Governments and High Courts were solicited on the Report of the Task Force. Based on the feedback received from State Governments and High Courts, the matter regarding implementation of the Report of the Task Force was deliberated upon in the 'meeting of the Advisory Council of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms held in November, 2012. It was, inter-alia, decided that the methodologies of the Judicial Impact Assessment as recommended by the Task Force may be gone into further by a Committee of Experts to assess the practicability of their implementation in the given circumstances. During the Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices held in New Delhi in April, 2013, this matter was included in the Action Taken Report. It was mentioned that expert opinions received so far have expressed practical difficulties in making assessment of the impact of legislation on the workload of judiciary. The practicability of the idea needs to be established before it is implemented. Accordingly, a Committee of Experts was constituted in September, 2013 to examine the issue of implementability of methodologies of Judicial Impact Assessment and suggest further action in this regard. The Committee in its report submitted on gth January, 2015, inter-alia, concluded that Judicial Impact Assessment was neither feasible nor desirable as a method of proper budgetary planning and allocation of funds for the judiciary. It suggested an ·alternative approach for budgetary planning for the judiciary involving the generation of periodic Access to Justice Reports to examine the needs of the judiciary in the light of their constitutional obligation to provide fair, quick and speedy justice.

The above report has been circulated to the State Governments and the High Courts. It is pertinent to mention here that on account of the recommendations of the Fourteenth Finance Commission, there has been a substantial increase in devolution of funds to the State Governments. The Central Government has, therefore, written to the State Governments to utilize the additional fiscal space available to them for enhancing the

. investment on judiciary in the States. Further, during the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers of States and Chief Justices of High Courts convened on 5th

April, 2015, it was, inter-alia, resolved that Chief Justices and Chief Ministers shall institute a mechanism for regular communication among themselves to resolve issues particularly those relating to infrastructure and manpower needs and facilities for the judiciary.

************


DEPARTMENT OF.JUSTICE

LOK SABHA

STARRED QUESTION NO. t*116

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, 03Ro MARCH, 2016

Infrastructure for Judiciary

t*116. SHRIMATI RAMA DEVI: SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:


(a) whether the Government has any mechanism to monitor and ensure that the funds released to various States under Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the development of infrastructure facilities for judiciary are utilised for the purpose within a stipulated time-frame;

(b) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor;

(c) the details of States which have not submitted utilisation certificates for the funds released by the Union Government for the purpose during each of the last three years and the current year, State I UT -wise;

(d) whether the Government has urged various State Governments including Andhra Pradesh and Telangana to submit the utilisation certificates which have become overdue and if so, the details thereof; and

(e) the other measures taken I being taken by the Government to grant more funds to States where the requisite infrastructure is lacking?

ANSWER


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

STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN REPLY TO PARTS (a) to (el of LOK SABHA STARRED QUESTION NO. *116 FOR ANSWER ON 03'a March, 2016.

The development of infrastructure facilities for judiciary is the primary responsibility

of the State Governments. However, in order to augment the resources of the State

Governments, a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for development of infrastructure

facilities for judiciary has been in operation since 1993-94.

The progress of infrastructure development for judiciary in States is monitored by a

committee chaired by the portfolio judge of the High Court as per the directions of the

Supreme Court in All India Judges Association cases (I.A. No.279 in W.P. (C) No.1022 of

1989). In the Joint Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices held on 07th April

2013, it was, inter-a/ia, decided that the mechanism created by the Supreme Court of

District and State Committees be made a permanent feature and the Chief Justices of

High Courts should actively utilise the said mechanism for ensuring timely proposals for

creation, furnishing, maintenance and development of infrastructure of Court buildings and

residences.

The details of funds sanctioned to the State Governments and Union Territories

during the last three years and the current year and funds for which Utilisation Certificates

have become due but not yet received from State Governments I Union Territories, have

been indicated in the Statement annexed. State Governments are reminded from time to

time to submit pending Utilisation Certificates. The State Governments of Andhra Pradesh

and Telegana have also been reminded in this regard. On receipt of the complete

proposals from the State Governments including utilisation certificates for the funds

sanctioned earlier, further financial assistance is sanctioned in terms of the guidelines of

the Scheme and subject to availability of funds.

On account of the recommendations of the Fourteenth Finance Commission, there

has been a substantial increase in devolution of funds to the State Governments. The

Central Government has, tt1erefore, written to the State Governments to utilize the

additional fiscal space available to them for enhancing the investment on judiciary in the

States.

*'II************

Annexure Statement referred to Lok Sabha Starred Question No. *116 for Reply on 03.03.2016 Details of Funds Sanctioned to the State Governments and Union Territories during the last three years and funds for which Utilisation Certificates have become due but not yet received.

(Rs. in Lakhs SI. State I UT Funds Funds Funds Funds Total amount for No. Sanctioned Sanctioned Sanctioned Sanctioned which Utilization

in 2012-13 in 2013-14 in 2014-15 in 2015-16 Certificate due but not yet received.

1. Andhra Pradesh 6393.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4516.00 includinq Telenqana

2. Bihar 1524.00 0.00 4909.35 0.00 90.65 3. Chhattisaarh 0.00 0.00 2176.60 0.00 132.00 4. Goa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 125.87 5. Guiarat 9893.00 10000.00 10000.00 5000.00 0.00 6. Harvana 0.00 3632.00 0.00 5000.00 0.00 7. Himachal Pradesh 0.00 806.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

8. Jammu & Kashmir 2572.00 3428.00 3429.00 1325.00 0.00

9. Jharkhand 1500.00 1693.0.0 3044.00 3044.00 0.00 10. Karnataka 7610.00 10384.00 16370.00 5000.00 0.00 11. Kera la 1499.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 490.95 12. Madhva Pradesh 2046.00 6141.00 6141.00 5000.00 0.00 13. Maharashtra 5920.24 10000.00 9975.00 5000.00 0.00 14. Orissa 1534.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2247.18 15. Pun lab 7902.00 12000.00 9805.00 5000.00 0.00 16. Rajasthan 1042.00 0.00 0.00 5000.00 0.00 17. Tamilnadu 1953.00 7343.00 0.00 0.00 2962.91 18. Uttarakhand 829.76 2043.00 3559.05 0.00 283.40 19. Uttar Pradesh 9398.00 12530.00 12531.00 5000.00 0.00 20. West Benqal 0.00 0.00 2000.00 0.00 0.00 Total (A) 61616.00 80000.00 83940.00 44369.00 10848.96 NE States

1. Arunachal Pradesh 750.00 0.00 1000.00 1593.00 0.00 2. Assam 2954.90 0.00 o.oo 0.00 2954.90 3. Manipur 0.00 1500.00 2000.00 2000.00 0.00 4. Meqhalaya 0.00 1474.00 1709.00 2037.00 0.00 5, Mizoram 704.78 812.56 1085.00 0.00 0.00 6. Naaaland 750.00 0.00 2016.00 0.00 0.00 7. Sikkim 549.50 2802.84 0.00 0.00 1727.53 8. Tripura 1495.60 2910.60 1550.00 0.00 3460.72

Total (B) 7204.78 9500.00 9360.00 5630.00 8143.15 UTs 1. A&N Islands 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2. Chandiqarh 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1423.25 3. Dadra & Nagar 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00

Haveli 4. Daman & Diu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.73 5. Delhi 2000.00 0.00 0.00 6040.32 0.00 6. Lakshadweep 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.76 7. Pondicherrv 0.00 0.00 0.00 259.68 263.25

Total (C) 2000.00 0.00 0.00 6300.00 2256.99 Grand Total IA+B+C) 70820.78 89500.00 93300.00 56299.00 21249.10

**'•*A**********



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 03Ro MARCH, 2016

Facilities for Differently-abled Persons

1225. SHRI PREM DAS RAI: SHRIMATI RAKSHATAI KHADSE:


(a) whether any facilities which are essential for the differently-abled persons are made available within the court premises in the country;

(b) if so, the number of such courts indicating the kind of facilities available for such persons and if not, the steps taken I being taken by the Government to make courts differently-abled friendly;

(c) whether the Government has ratified I adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities;

(d) if so, the details and the implementation status thereof; and

(e) whether the Government proposes to establish "Creche" at various court complexes in the country and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): The development of infrastructure facilities for judiciary in the States

including facilities essential for the differently-abled persons and creche. etc. is

the responsibility of the State Governments. The Central Government augments

the resources of the State Governments by releasing financial assistance under a

Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the development of judicial infrastructure.

In the conference of Chief Justices held on 051h and 061hApril, 2013, it was, inter

a/ia, resolved that the High Courts shall prepare Vision Statements for High Court

and District Courts and Five-year and Annual Plans which inter-alia will include

special care for differently-abled persons while preparing the construction plan for

Court complexes and facilities be provided for them.

The Government has ratified the UN Convention on Rights of Persons with

Disabilities (UNCRPD) on 01/10/2007. As a part of implementation of the

convention, the Government has already introduced Rights of Persons with

Disabilities Bill, 2014 in Rajya Sabha on 7 /2/2014 to replace the existing Persons

with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation)

Act, 1995 to make the law in-line with UNCRPD. The Government has also

submitted 1'1 country report before the concerned UN Committee in November,

2015.

*****************





Mechanism to Deal with Complaints against Judges

1251. SHRI RAHUL SHEWALE: SHRI NAGENDRA KUMAR PRADHAN: SHRINANA PATOLE: SHRI VINA YAK BHAURAO RAUT: DR. SHRIKANT EKNA TH SHINDE:


(a) whether the Government proposes to bring any legislation to replace the present system of dealing with complaints against Judges of Supreme Court and High Court and to ensure Judicial Accountability;

(b) if so, the details and the present status thereof;

( c) the time by which a final decision is likely to be taken in this regard;

(d) the details of mechanism being followed to deal with the complaints against judges; and

(e) the number of such complaints received during each of the last three years and the current year along with the action taken thereon?


(a) to (e): As per the existing "in-house mechanism" for dealing with the complaints

against the higher judiciary, the Chief Justice of India is competent to receive complaints

against the conduct of the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justices of the High

Comis. Similarly, the Chief Justices of the High Courts. are competent to receive

complaints against the conduct of judges of the High Courts. The complaints received by

the Government are being forwarded to the Supreme Court or the concerned High Comi,

as the case may be, for action as deemed appropriate. The Central Government has no

mechanism to address such complaints and as such, no data in this regard is maintained .

... 2/-

-2-

To change the existing system for investigation into the complaints of

misbehaviour or incapacity of Judges of the Supreme Court or High Cou11s and to

euforce greater accountability, a Bill titled "The Judicial Standards and Accountability

Bill" was moved by the Government in the previous Lok Sabha. However, the Bill

lapsed with the dissolution of 15•li Lok Sabha.

***



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 3rd MARCH, 2016

Training to Judicial Officials

1308. SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI: DR. K. KAMARAJ:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICEbe pleased to state:

(a) the number of judicial officials received training at the National Judicial Academy India during the last three years and the current year, State/UT-wise including from West Bengal;

(b) the details of the programmes on which these officials underwent imparted training during the said period;

(c) the steps taken/being taken by the Government to improve the quality of legal profession in the country;

(d) whether the Government proposes to grant practicing allowance to the junior lawyers so as to attract better talent to the profession; and

(e) if so, the details and the present status thereof and if not, the other measures taken/being taken by the Government in this regard?

ANSWER


(a) and (b) : A statement indicating the number of Judicial Officers

who received training at the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal for the

years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and the current year 2015-16, State/UT

wise is at annexure. As regards the details of the trainings imparted to

these Officers during the said period, information in this regard is available

at National Judicial Academy's portal (www.nja.nic.in) under the heading

'NJA Programmmes'.

..... 2/-

2

(c): The Bar Council of India started the All India Bar Examination (AIBE)

from 201 O to examine an advocate's capability to practice the profession of

law in India. After passing the examination, candidates are awarded

"Certificate of Practice" by the Bar Council of India.

(d) and (e): The Bar Council of India has informed that as on date, no

scheme for the Scholarship/stipend for the newly enrolled advocates is

sponsored by them. However, some State Governments of their own or in

association with concerned State bar Councils like Karnataka, Madhya

Pradesh, etc. have some schemes of Scholarship/stipend for the newly

enrolled advocates.

Annexure

Annexure referred to in reply to part (a) & (b) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.1308 due for answer on 03.03.2016

)\fational Ji1dicial 1\_cadernv The numbc1· of Judiclal Officers who received iraining at the NJA for the last

. three vears and the current vear . ~ ' <'"--Mii"''~ 2·1 13 201314 20·1·~ 2015-16 ,· __ ,_ :~ :<I ,,..~ ~~-~~(-.:)~;-· ~o 2-_ -... ___._-=~=-~~-1;;.1

I Andhra Pradesh 116 145 59 63

2 Arunachal Pradesh 0 3 5 3 3 Assam 44 115 89 I 30 4 Bihar 92 100 146 36 5 Chhattisgarh . 76 98 44 50

6 Goa 4 I 3 7 3 •' - -· ·---·--·-·-· l J--i'ls. 7 G1!jarat 75 140 35

--~-·- -F 8 Ha!:)'ana 2 J 29 65 JO

9 Himachal Pradesb 32' 129 103 '

41 10 J ammu & Kashmir 28 49 68 24 l I Jharkhand 84 93 96 26 12 Karnataka 42 168 161 45 13 Kcrala . 29 146 99 41 14 Madhya Pradt~L ____________ 134 172 200 '4S 15 .rvfahRrashtra 85 154 189 58

16 Manipur 0 19 3 16 ----. 17 JVIeghalaya 0 9 JO 0

18 Mizoram 0 1 4 6 19 Nagaland 3 7 7 6 20 Odis ha 68 91 104· 3 l 21 Punjab & Ha1 yan:1 IS . 41 46' 28 22 Raiasthan 120 177 I92 38 r -J Sikkim 5 4 I I 24 Tamil Nadu 70 183 134 57 25 Telangana 0 0 54 18 26 Tripura 0 37 40 21 ---

. 27 Uttar Pradesh 130 165 182 55 --·-----28 Uttarakhand 39 58 47 30

29 West Bengal 80 .94 127 42

Union Terrote:ries 1 Andaman & Nicobar b 0 0 0

2 · Chandigarh I5 41 20 22 3 Dadar & N?.g_ar 1-laveli 1--0 0 0 0 .

4 Daman& Diu 0 0 0 5 Diu 0 0 0 0 6 Delhi 47 92 12Z 47 7 Lakshadweep 0 0 0 0 .

8 Puducherry 0 0 2 0 ---·---------'··----

Total 1449 .2564 2604 941

. )'

·' .)~~ -



LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. t1342

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 03RD MARCH, 2016

Pending Court Cases

t1342. SHRI HARINARAYAN RAJBHAR: SHRI KODIKUNNIL SURESH: SHRI SHARAD TRIPATHI: PROF. RAVINDRA VISHWANATH GAIKWAD: SHRI RATTAN LAL KATARIA: SHRI RAYAPATI SAMBASIVA RAO: SHRI KAUSHALENDRA KUMAR: SHRI RAJAN VICHARE: SHRIRAJESHBHAICHUDASAMA: SHRI KALIKESH N. SINGH DEO: SHRI DILIP PATEL: SHRI RABINDRA KUMAR JENA: SHRI NANDI YELLAIAH:


(a) the number of criminal and civil cases pending in the Supreme Court, High Courts and Subordinate Courts indicating separately the number of cases which are pending for more than ten years;

(b) the number of cases disposed of by these Courts during each of the last three years and the current year, Court I State I UT-wise;

(c) whether the Government has assessed the reasons for delay in disposing of cases which are pending for more than ten years;

(d) if so, the outcome thereof along with the remedial measures taken I being taken as a result thereof; and

(e) the other measures taken I being taken by the Government to address the issue for expeditious disposal of pending cases?

ANSWER


(a) to (e): Data on pendency of cases is maintained by the Supreme Court and High

Courts. As per the information made available by the Supreme Court of India, details

of civil and criminal cases pending in the Supreme Court of India; and civil and criminal

cases pending for more than 1 O years in the Supreme Court of India; and number of

cases disposed of by the Supreme Court of India during the last three years and the

current year are as under:-

Number of Pending Number of Cases pending for Number of Cases disposed during last Cases as on more than 10 years up to three years and current year upto 19,02.2016 19.02.2016. 19.02.2016

Civil I Criminal Civil I Criminal 2013 I 2014 I 2015 I 2016 48,418 I 11,050 1, 132 I 84 40, 189 I 45 042 I 47,424 I 6,054

As per information made available by High Courts, details of pending cases in

High Courts and District and Subordinate Courts are as under:-

Number of Pending Number of Cases pending Number of Pending Number of Cases pending Cases in High Courts for more than 1 O years in Cases in District and for more than 1 O years in as on 31.12.2014 High Courts as on Subordinate Courts as District and Subordinate

31.12.2014 on 31.12.2014 Courts as on 31.12.2014 Civil I Criminal Civil I Criminal Civil I Criminal Civil I Criminal

3116492 I 1037465 589631____j 187999 8234281 I 18254124 611658 I 1432079

The details of cases disposed of during 2012, 2013 and 2014 by the High

Courts and District I Subordinate Courts are given in the Statements at Annexure - I

and Annexure - II respectively.

Some of the main factors responsible for pendency of cases in courts are

increasing number of state and central legislations, accumulation of first appeals,

continuation of ordinary civil jurisdiction in some of the High Courts, vacancies of

Judges, appeals against orders of quasi-judicial forums going to High Courts, number

of revisions I appeals, frequent adjournments, indiscriminate use of writ jurisdiction,

lack of adequate arrangement to monitor, track and bunch cases for hearing.

The Chief Justices' Conference held on 03rd and 04th April 2015 has resolved

that each High Court shall establish an Arrears Committee to clear the backlog of

cases pending for more than five years. As per information available, Arrears

Committees have been set up in the High Courts of (i) Allahabad, (ii) Bombay, (iii)

Calcutta, (iv) Chhattisgarh, (v) Delhi, (vi) Himachal Pradesh, (vii) Jammu & Kashmir,

(viii) Jharkhand, (ix) Kerala, (x) Madhya Pradesh, (xi) Madras, (xii) Manipur, (xiii)

Meghalaya, (xiv) Orissa, (xv) Patna (xvi) Punjab & Haryana, (xvii) Sikkim, (xviii)

Tripura, and (xix) Uttrakhand.

*************

Annexure-1

Statement referred to in reply to part (a) to (e) of Lok Sabha Un-starred Question No. t1342 dated 03.03.2016 regarding Pending Court Cases.

C d' d f. H' h C rt d . I t th as es 1spose o m 1gi OU S urmg as ree vears SI. High Court 2012 2013 2014 No Disposal of cases Disposal of Disposal of cases

cases 1 Allahabad 2,47,539 2,36,821 3,10,294 2 Andhra Pradesh 66,130 58,278 66,239 3 Bombay 1,74,020 1,40,761 1,30,580 4 Calcutta 78,428 1,34,938 95,656 5 Delhi 35,656 35,371 40,154 6 Gujarat 63,778 64,450 74,444 7 Gauhati 35,713 30,308 27,467 8 Hlmachal Pradesh 37,772 36,455 62,270 9 Jammu &Kashmir 16,380 24,916 23,151 10 Karnataka 1,21,624 1,28,134 1,19,824 11 Kera la 78,801 68,871 72, 173 12 Madras 2,46,200 2,31,817 1,29,954

13 Madhya Pradesh 1,00,281 1,11,348 1,29,373 14 Orissa 81,388 70,262 76,523 15 Patna 91,328 82,343 1,04,955 16 Punjab & Haryana 1,08,266 1,11,465 1, 14,801 17 Rajasthan 1,31,277 1,27,928 83,792 18 Sikkim 126 140 230 19 Uttarakhand 13,616 15,661 13,386 20 Chhattisgarh 27,817 28,206 28,155 21 Jharkhand 30,030 25,970 22,327

22 Tripura* 0 4,379 5,144 23 Manlpur* 0 2,677 1,926 24 Meghalaya* 0 1,418 1,724 Total 17,86,170 17,72,917 17,34,542

* .. ro Operat1onallsat1on of High Court was not1f1ed on 23 March, 2013.

**********

Annexure-11 Statement referred to in reply to part (a) to (e) of Lok Sabha Un-starred Question No. f1342 dated 03.03.2016 regarding Pending Court Cases.

c d" d f . . . d s d" c . h as es ISPOSe o 111 District an ubor mate ourts dur111a last t ree vears SI. No States 2012 2013 2014

Disposal of Disposal of cases Disposal of cases cases

1 Andhra Pradesh 6,06,447 5, 14,867 6,47,130 and Telanaana

2 Arunachal Pradesh 7,355 7,444 7,615 3 Assam 2,39,706 3,14,672 2,76, 138 4 Bihar 3,04,786 3,15,586 3,05,583 5 Chhattisgarh 1,62,104 1,79,065 1,76,144 6 Goa 33,886 30,717 30,625 7 Gujarat 10,72,123 11,37,159 11,32,433 8 Haryana 7,33,591 6,08,315 5,87,385 9 Hlmachal Pradesh 2,46,052 2,93,575 4,09,732 10 Jammu & Kashmir 2,91,100 3,07,192 2,97,507 11 Jharkhand 1,23,777 1,18,076 1, 10,068 12 Karnataka 10,35,706 10,17,437 13,67,041 13 Kera la 11, 12,342 11,71,821 13,55,926 14 Madhya Pradesh 12,17,733 12,73,437 11, 13,382 15 Maharashtra 20,48,255 17,10,180 15,36,322 16 Manipur 14,572 16, 189 14,257 17 Meghalaya 2,982 . 3,284 11,691 18 Mlzoram 11,747 10,270 10,747 19 Nagaland 3,179 3,062 3,047 20 Orlssa 3,00,337 4, 14,772 4,70,085 21 Punjab 7,58,927 6, 11,671 5,49,300 22 Rajas than 11,50,808 11,99,745 11,32,028 23 Sikkim 1,913 2,146 2,008 24 Tamil Nadu 14,99,884 18,44,056 16,45,329 25 Tripura 1,48,688 1,58,838 1,93,003 26 Uttar Pradesh 27,98,690 29,66,521 31,82,318 27 Uttarakhand 1,78,409 2,22,318 2,20,660 28 West Bengal and A 9,92,367 11,84,289 10,89,309

& N Island 29 Chandigarh 1,38,558 1,53,772 1,80,616 30 D & N Haveli and 8,451 3,344 2,771

Daman & Diu 31 Delhi 9,18,683 9,57, 154 9,30,732 32 Lakshadweep 96 93 95 33 Pondicherry 33,899 32,479 28,631

Total 1.81,97,153 1,87,83,646 1,90, 19,658 ******************

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE




Appointment of Judges

1343. SHRI SANJA Y DHOTRE:

SHRI KODIKUNNIL SURESH:

DR. SHRIKANT EKNATH SHINDE:

SHRI RAJESH KUMAR DIWAKER:

SHRI RA VINDRA KUMAR PANDEY:

SHRI HARINARA YAN RAJBHAR:

SHRI P. NAGARAJAN:

SHRI ASHWINI KUMAR:

SHRI DEV AJIBHAI G. FA TEP ARA: SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB:

SHRI M.B. RAJESH:

SHRI P. KUMAR:

SHRI B. VINOD KUMAR:

SHRI RAJAN VICHARE:

SHRI KALIKESH N. SINGH DEO:

SHRIDILIP PATEL: SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:

SHRI BHOLA SINGH:

SHRI K. P ARASURAMAN:

SHRI NANDI YELLAIAH:


(a) the approved/working strength and vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court, High Courts and District/Subordinate Courts in the country at present along with the number of judges appointed during 2015-16 in these courts, State/UT-wise;

.. 2/-

-2-

(b) whether the Government has undertaken any study to assess the need to improve the Judgespopulation ratio in view of huge pendency of cases and if so, the details and the outcome thereof;

(c) the follow up action taken by the Government in view of the Supreme Court order declaring the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 20 I 4 as unconstitutional and void;

( d) whether the Govenunent has invited suggestions from various qumters for framing a Memorandum of Procedure in order to introduce a new and improved collegium system for appointment of Judges; and

( e) if so, the details and the present status thereof?

ANSWER



(a) A statement showing the approved strength, working strength and vacancies of Judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts as on 29.02.2016 is given at Annexure-I. The number of Judges of Supreme Court and High courts appointed from 1st January, 2015 till 13th April 2015

i.e. the date on which the Constitution(Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 were brought into force is given at Annexure-II. With the coming into force of these Acts, all appointments of Judges of Supreme Comt and High Courts through the Collegium process as laid down in the Memorandum of Procedure were

stopped. However, with the revival of the Collegium system, the process of appointment of Judges has resumed. A Statement showing the sanctioned strength, working strength and vacancies of Judicial Officers in District and Subordinate Courts in the country as on 30.06.2015

is given at Annexure-III.

(b) In All India Judges' Association Case, the Hon'ble Supreme Comt in its Judgement dated 21st March, 2002, on a comparative assessment of the position in other countries directed that

there should be 50 judges for a million population in the country. Based on the population, as per census 2011 and sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court and High courts as on 29.02.2016, and the sanctioned strength of Judges/Judicial Officers of District and Subordinate Courts as on 31.12.2015, the Judge population ratio in the country works out to be 17. 72

Judges/Judicial Officers per million population.

.. .3/-

-3-

(c) to (e): The Supreme Court vide its order dated 16.10.2015 declared that the system of appointment of Judges to Supreme Court, and Chief Justices and Judges of High Court from one High Court to another as existing prior to Constitution (Ninety-Nineth Amendment) Act, 2014 called the "Collegium System" to be operative. The Supreme Court simultaneously decided to consider introduction of appropriate measmes, if any, for an improved working of the "Collegium System". The Govenunent of India submitted its suggestions subject to its reservation about the correctness of the Judgment. The Government has taken the stand that it reserves its liberty to take such action as it may decide fit. Further, the Parliament has the power within the parameters of the Constitution to govern the criteria and process for appointment of Judges to the Supreme Comi and High Courts.

The Supreme Comi pronounced its Order on improvement in the "Collegium System" on 16.12.2015. Vide this order they have decided that the Government of India may finalize the existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) by supplementing it in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, and based on the unanimous view of the Collegium comprising the four seniormost puisne Judges of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has indicated broad categories under which existing MoP can be supplemented such as eligibility criteria, transparency in the appointment process, Secretariat and complaints etc. The Department of Justice is in the process of preparing a revised draft Memorandum of Procedme in consultation with the State Governments.

***

Annexure I - referred in reply to part (a) of Lok Sabha USQ No.1343 for answer on 03.03.2016

(As on 29.02.2016)

SI. Name of the Court Approved Strength Working Strength Vacancies as per

No. Approved Strength

A. Supreme Court of India 31 25 06

B. High Court Pmt. Addi Total Pmt. Addi Total Pmt. Addi Total

1 Allahabad 76 84 160 65 ()7 72 11 77 88

2 High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad* 46 15 61 16 10 26 30 05 35

3 Bombay 71 23 94 38 22 60 33 01 34

4 Calcutta 45 13 58 21 22 43 24 -09 15

5 Chhattisgarh 17 05 22 03 06 09 14 -01 13

6 Delhi 45 15 60 34 05 39 11 10 21

7 Gauhati 18 06 24 08 07 15 10 -01 09

8 Gujarat 39 13 52 27 03 30 12 10 22

9 Himachal Pradesh 10 03 13 07 -- 07 03 03 06

10 Jammu & Kashmir 13 04 17 08 01 09 05 03 08 Jharkhand

.

11 19 06 25 08 04 12 11 02 13

12 Karnataka 47 15 62 22 09 31 25 06 31 13 Kera la 27 11 38 19 16 35 08 -05 03

14 Madhya Pradesh 40 13 53 27 02 29 13 11 24

15 Madras 56 19 75 35 0 35 21 19 40

16 Manipur 04 01 05 04 0 04 0 01 01 ·-17 Meghalaya 03 01 04 02 0 02 01 01 02

18 Orissa 20 07 27 15 06 21 05 01 06

19 Patna• 40 13 53 24 05 29 16 08 24

20 Punjab& Haryana * 64 21 85 37 11 48 27 10 37

21 Rajasthan 38 12 50 21 03 24 17 09 26

22 Sikkim 03 0 03 02 0 02 01 0 01

23 Trlpura 04 0 04 04 0 04 0 0 0

24 Uttarakhand 09 02 11 06 0 06 03 02 05

Total 754 302 1056 453 139 592 301 163 464

*Acting Chief Justice

Annexure II

Referred to in reply to part (a) of Lok Sabha USQ No.1343 for answer on 03.03.2016

' SI. No Name of the Court Judges appointed from

01.01.2015 till 13.04.2015

A. Sunreme Court of India 01

B. HIGH COURT

1. GAUHATI 05 2. ALLAHABAD 07 3. CALCUTTA 08 4. KERALA 07 5. SIKKIM 01 6. ORISSA 03 7. JHARKHAND 01 8. PATNA 02 9. PUNJAB &HARYANA 01

TOTAL 35

Annexure Ill

Referred to in reply to part (a) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.1343 for answer on 03.03.2016

(Position as on 30.06.2015) Sr. Name of State I UT Total Sanctioned Total Working Vacancies No. Streni?th Strenmh 1 Arunachal Pradesh 17 15 2 2 Andhra Pradesh & Telengana 1034 812 222 3 Assam 420 307 113 4 Bihm· 1727 997 730 5 Chandigarh 30 30 0 6 Chhattisgarh 356 296 60 7 Daman & Diu and Dadra Nagar 7 6 1

Have Ii 8 Delhi 793 469 324 9 Goa 52 39 13 10 Gujarat 1914 1197 717 11 Haryana 644 478 166 12 Himachal Pradesh 146 137 9 13 Jammu and Kaslunir 245 217 28 14 Jharkhand 590 368 222 15 Karnataka 1112 824 288 16 Kerala 456 419 37 17 Lakshadweep 3 3 0 18 Madhya Pradesh 1461 1234 227 19 Maharashtra 2088 1618 470 20 Manipur 41 32 9 21 Meghalava 56 29 27 22 Mizoram 63 31 32 23 Nagaland 27 25 2 24 Odisha 694 613 81 25 Puducherry 21 9 12 26 Punjab 672 498 174 27 Rajas than 1191 822 369 28 Sikkim 18 14 4 29 Tamil nadu 1004 840 164 30 Tripura 104 72 32 31 Uttar Pradesh 2097 1845 252 32 Uttarakhand 281 208 73 33 West Bengal and A & N Islands 994 856 138 Total 20358 15360 4998

**********





Incidents of Assaults within Court 11 remiscs

2121. SHRI B. SENGUTTUVAN:


(a) whether the Ministry of Law and Justice proposes to request deployment of security forces in the court premises to ensure the safety of the litigants in view of the recent incidents of assault by advocates within the court premises in the country;

(b) if so, the details thereof; and

(c) the other steps taken/being taken by the Government to prevent recurrence of such incidents within the court premises?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND ,JUSTICE


(a) to (c) : No, Madam. As per the information made available by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MBA), the state governments and local police are primarily responsible for security in the comi premises and in the year 2007, MHA issued general guidelines to State Police forces, including Delhi Police, regarding maintenance of security of High Comis and District /Sub-01'dinate Courts in the State. Ministry of Home Affairs fmther informed that taking cognizance of the disturbances arising out of agitating Advocates in the Court premises, Madras High Court issued directions to Central/State to deploy Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) for the security of Madras High Court in the suomotu writ petition No. 29197/2015 and CISF has been deployed.

***



LOK SABHA

· UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. t2122

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 10rn MARCH, 2016

Model Courts

t2122. DR. BANSHILAL MAHATO:


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

(b) if so, the details and the present status thereof, State I UT - wise;

(c) the salient features and the objectives thereof;

(d) the expenditure likely to be incurred for the purpose; and

(e) the time-frame set for setting up of these courts?

ANSWER

.MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI D. V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

(a) to (e): A Sub-Group on Model Courts was constituted by the Advisory

Council of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms. The

concept for Model Courts emerged from a variety of factors including meeting

the needs of the stakeholders. The Report of the Sub-Group, inter-alia,

recommended grant of financial assistance for establishing about ten Model

Courts each under six High Courts, namely, Calcutta, Bombay, Gauhati,

Madhya Pradesh, Madras, and Punjab and Haryana. The above

recommendations of the Sub-Group were examined and it was noted that

major items of expenditure under the proposed grant were improvement of

physical and technical infrastructure of the selected Subordinate Courts.

Since the Central Government was already providing financial assistance for

court infrastructure and computerization of District and Subordinate Courts

throughout the country, it was not found feasible to operationalise a separate

scheme for this purpose.

****

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION No. 2190

TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE10rnMARCH, 2016

Use of Audio-Video Recordings

2190. SHRI CH. MAI.LA REDDY SHRIMATI KAVITHA KALVAKUNTLA


(a) whether any decision has been taken regarding audio-video

recording of court proceedings in the country;


(c) whether the Government proposes to make use of digital

technology for conducting hearings and recordings of

evidences in the courts;

(d) if so, the details and the present status thereof; and

(e) the expenditure likely to be incurred for the purpose?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW &JUSTICE


(a) to (b):The Government has been receiving suggestions for the implementation of audio-video recording of court proceedings. The issue has also been discussed in the meetings of Advisory Council of National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms.In the meeting of eCommittee of the Supreme Court of India held on 81

"

January, 2014, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) advised deferment

of audio-video recording of court proceedings as this would require consultations with Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts. Minister of Law and Justice has written to Chief Justice of India on 101

" July, 2015 and subsequently on 201" January, 2016

requesting him to consider the proposal of Audio-video recording. Reply of CJI is awaited.

(c) to (e): The Government of India has proposed implementation of Video Conferencing (VC) facility between Courts and Jails. VC has been piloted in five districts under the supervision of eCommittee of the Supreme Court of India. Based on the experience of pilots, It was decided in consultation with the

eCommittee to provide VC facilities for 488 Court complexes and 342 jails out of which equipment has been delivered at 667

locations. Apart from VC facilities being provided under the eCourts Project, some States have implemented VC in courts from

their own resources also. ,The Phase II of eCourts proposes for installation of Video Conferencing at the cost of Rs.33.10 Cr which will be used initially for recording evidence insensitive cases and

gradually extended to cover as many types of cases as possible.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE


LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 101h MARCH, 2016

Court Fees

+2225. SHRI HARISH CHANDRA ALIAS HARISH DWIVEDI:

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

(a) whether the Government proposes to amend relevant laws and increase the court fees in the country;


(c) whether the Government proposes to bring uniformity in charges of court fees across the country; and

(d) if so, the details thereof?

a) No, Madam.

(b) Does not arise.

ANSWER


(c) and (d) The levying of the Court fees on institution and trial of suits and

the petitions presented to various High Courts and lower courts is regulated

under the Court Fees' Act, 1870. However, under the Devolution Act, 1920, the

power to amend the Act in its application to the States has been delegated to

the State Governments. In view of this position, it is for the State Governments

to revise/raise fees payable in their High Courts and subordinate courts.


(DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 28THAPRIL, 2016

Use of Technology

797. SHRI RATTAN LAL KATARIA


(a) whether the Government proposes to make use of technology in making the justice delivery system more transparent, accessible and affordable in the country;

(b) if so, the details and the present status thereof; and

(c) the steps taken/being taken by the Government to make it possible for people to access the records of the court cases thereby making the legal process more transparent and user-friendly?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW &JUSTICE (Shri D. V. Sadananda Gowda)

(a) to (c):The Government has been using technology extensively in making the justice delivery system across the country more transparent, accessible and affordable. It has been implementing an eCourts Mission Mode Project which is one of the national eGovernance projects. The project broadly covers computerisation of all district and subordinate courts as well as up gradation of ICT infrastructure of the Supreme Court and High Courts.

Theproject has resulted in computerisation of approximately 14,000 district and subordinate courts. It has resulted in making available case data and orders/judgements online, thus instilling transparency and facilitating easy access to case information by litigants and lawyers.

The national e-Courts portal (http://www.ecourts.gov.in) has been made operational. It provides online services such as case registration, cause lists, case status, daily orders and final judgements. Currently litigants can access case status information in respect of over 6.3 crore pending and decided cases and more than 2.6 crore orders/judgements pertaining to district and subordinate courts. Availability of case data online imparts transparency to the functioning of courts and facilitates easy access of such data to lawyers and litigants.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE)


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 281H APRIL, 2016

e-Services in the Judiciary

804. SHRI NA.LIN KUMAR KA.TEEL: SHRI ASADUDDll\I OWAISI:


(a) whether the Government has introduced or proposes to

introduce e-services in High Courts and Supreme Court for the

litigants and if so, the details and the present status thereof,

court-wise;

(b) the time by which such e-services are likely to be provided at

all the High Courts in the country;

(c) the measures taken/being taken by the Government to bring

uniformity in court procedures in the country;

(d) the details of Courts/Jails which have implemented Video

Conferencing (VC) facility in the country; and

(e) the details of Courts/Jails which are proposed to implement

VC facility along with the time by which the said facility is

likely to be made operational?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE

(Shri D. V. Sadananda Gowda)

(a) and (b): The Supreme Court and High Courts of the country are already providing eServices such as causelists, case status, daily

orders, judgments etc. Further, as informed by the eCommittee of the Supreme Court of India, High Courts of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab & Haryana and Bombay are providing eFiling also.

(c): The National Court Management System (NCMS) of the Supreme Court and the eCourts project of the Government has undertaken the process re-engineering exercise in order to facilitate uniformity of court procedures. Also, the Government is working with the eCommittee of Supreme Court on the uniformity of nomenclature of case types, which would help in standardising case types. further, Government is developing Common Application Software with the help of the eCommittee for all High Courts and District Courts to integrate using same software with uniform data structures across the country.

(d) and (e): Video Conferencing (VC) facility between courts and jails has been piloted in five districts and the facility has been extended to 493 Court complexes and 347 jails out of which equipment has been delivered at more than 800 locations. Phase II extends the facility to 2500 court complexes and 800 jails. Apart from VC facilities being provided under the eCourts Project, some States have implemented VC in courts from their own resources also. Details of the locations is placed at Annex.

'

.

,.,

Annexure

Annexure as referred to in reply to parts (d) and (e) of the Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.804 for reply on 28.4.2016

'• ,, ,' . , ,Ye lifipli3ment;itfon at Courts ·.··.•····•,, · ' ·:·· '.

: ~ : ;- -- ': ;· ._ ... ,- .. _· .. - -. ~.-: -, _; .-.- -. ----_ - '.' . . . .·,·<vo ··1mi>1em~ri(e~ - 1rt1R1em~nte<I

·.,-.

, tmpfemehted · .. · $r. ·,High

- . ·· ..... ,§y · ·· ... · . a~ i?~~ot , Tot~IJ§f' ' at.Jails as No. Cc>qrt

.... Hlg~qpurts r·. ;P~~!i~!IJ(Jf part.of.Rhase J .-,_ .. -: ·,:,.' . ·'couns·> .. <>fecourts -. ' ··- · - $tate -.,- .. • ... · -• · scourts · ' ' <>overnme'iit~ · #rojfirit "

'

C';'P,fdj~ct' ' .

I, - ,. ·,.· _.··

1. ALLAHABAD 40 0 40 0 2, TELENGANA& 14 23 37 17

ANDHRA PRADESH

3. BOMBAY 68 40 108 ~·

36 4. CALCUTTA 1 20 21 19

-5. CHHATTISGARH 17 87 104 28 6. DELHI 6 0 6 0 7. GAUHATI 1 61 62 52

8. GUJARAT 24 0 24 0 9. HI MAC HAL PRADESH 11 16 27 0 10. JAM MU & KASHMIR 0 12 12 14 11. JHARKHAND 22 10 32 10 12. KARNATAKA 32 0 32 0 13. KERALA 20 9 29 7 14. MADHYA PRADESH 50 50 100 46 15. MADRAS 70 23 93 8 16. MANIPUR 0 12 12 2 17. MEGHALAYA 0 5 5 3 18. ORI SSA 12 43 55 42 19. PATNA 43 0 43 0 20. PUNJAB & HARYANA 98 19 117 15 21. RAJASTHAN 0 35 35 33 22. SIKKIM 0 4 4 2 23. TRI PURA 3 2 5 2 24. UTTARAKHAND 1 22 23 11

Total 533 493 1026 347

Note:

Information about implementation of VC at Jails other than through' Phase I of the eCourts Project is not available with the office of the eCommittee.



LOK SABHA UNST ARRED QUESTION N0.848


Setting up of New Courts

848. DR. SHASHI THAROOR: SHRI PRABHAKAR REDDY KOTHA: SHRI BADRUDDIN AJMAL: PROF. SAUGATA ROY:


(a) the details of proposals received by the Government for establishment of Bench of High Court at all the State Capitals including Thiruvananthapuram along with the action taken thereon, proposal-wise;

(b) the present status of progress made towards establishment of separate High Courts for the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana;

(c) the details of High Coutis functioning in North-Eastern States along with the sanctioned/working strength of Judges therein;

(d) whether the Government proposes to establish High Court in those North-Eastern States which do not have their own High Court and if so, the details and the present status thereof; and

(e) whether the Goverlllllent proposes to set np National Court of Appeal or Benches of Supreme Court in the country and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER



(a): In accordance with the recollllllendations made by the Jaswant Singh Commission and judgment pronounced by the Apex Court in W.P.(C) No. 379 of 2000, Bench( es) of the High Court are established after due consideration of a complete proposal from the State

2/-

-2-

Government, which is to provide infrastructure and meet the expenditure, along with the consent of the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, which is required to look after the day to day administration of the High Court and its Bench. The proposal should also have the consent of the Govemor of the concemed State.

Requests for establislunent of High Court Benches in different parts of the country have been received from various sources, including some State Govertnnents. However, at present there is no proposal complete in all aspects pending for consideration by the Central Govermnent.

The Chief Minister of Kerala had sent a request in the year 2005 for setting up a bench of Kerala High Court at Thiruvananthapuram. The Chief Justice of High Court of Kerala has not approved the establishment of the High Court Bench at Thiruvananthapuram.

(b) The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, provides for setting up of a separate High Comt for the State of Andltl'a Pradesh. The Act also provides that once separate High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh is established, the existing High Court will go to the State ofTelangana. However, separate High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh could not be established yet as the State Govermnent has not yet completed all the necessary infrastructure for setting up of a separate High Court.

(c)and(d): Gauhati High Court is common High Court for the States of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram & Arunachal Pradesh. Separate High Courts have been established w.e.f. 23.03.2013 in the States of Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura. Separate High Courts for the States of Arnnachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram have not been established because the State Goverlllllents has not completed creation of necessary infrastructure. A statement showing the detail of the High Courts functioning in North-Eastern States alongwith the sanctioned/working strength of Judges is enclosed as Annexure.

(e): Article 130 of the Constitution states that the Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint. The Law Commission, in its 229111 Repo1t had also suggested that a Constitutional Bench be set up at Delhi to deal with constitutional and other allied issues of national impo1tance and four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern region at Delhi, the Southern region at Che1111ai/Hyderabad, the Eastern region at Kolkata and Western region at Mumbai to deal with all appellate work arising out of the orders/judgments of the High Courts of the particular region. However, the Supreme cou1t has not agreed to such a proposal. There is also a Public Interest Litigation being heard by the Supreme Court on the need to set up a National Court of Appeal. The matter is sub-judice.

* * *

SI. No.

I

2

3

4

5

Annexure

Statement referred to in reply to parts (c) and (cl) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.848 to be answered on 28.04.2016

High Court Principal Jurisdiction Sanctioned strength Working strength Seat

Gauhati Gu\vahati Assan1, Nagaland, Mizoram, 24 14 & Anmachal Pradesh.

Sikkim Gangtok Sikkim 03 02

Manipur Imphal Manipur 05 05

Meghalaya Shillong Meghalaya 04 02

Tripura Agartala Tripura 04 04

* * i:<

-



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 281h APRIL, 2016

Vacations and Working Hours in the Judiciary

867. SHRI RAHUL SHEWALE: SHRI ASHWINI KUMAR: SHRI NAGENDRA KUMAR PRADHAN:


(a) whether the Government proposes to curtail the vacation period and extend the working hours in the judiciary in order to clear the huge backlog of cases pending in various courts in the country;


(c) the follow-up action taken on the recommendations made in Report No.230 of the Law Commission of India in this regard along with the present status thereof; and

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

ANSWER


(a) to (d}: Government does not have under its consideration any proposal to curtail

the vacation period and extend the working hours in the Courts.

The duration of vacations is governed by the Rules/Regulations framed by

the concerned High Court and the Supreme Court. The vacation/working

days/working hours in the District /Subordinate Courts are regulated by the

respective High Court.

. .. .. 21-

2

The 23oth Report of the Law Commission of India submitted in August, 2009

recommended, inter-alia, that considering the staggering arrears, vacations in the

higher judiciary must be curtailed by at least 1 O to 15 days and the court working

hours should be extended by at least half-an-hour. The Report was examined by the

Government and forwarded to Chief Justices of all High Courts to consider the

suggestions for adoption, particularly for clearing the backlog of cases.

The Supreme Court notified the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 on 27th May,

2014 wherein, inter-alia, it is provided that the period of summer vacation shall not

exceed seven weeks from the earlier ten weeks. It is further provided that the length

of the summer vacation and the number of holidays for the Court and the offices of

the Court shall be such as may be fixed by the Chief Justice and notified in the

official Gazette so as not to exceed one hundred and three days, excluding Sundays

not falling in the vacation and during Court holidays. The Supreme Court Rules,

2013 have come into force with effect from 19th August, 2014.



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 281h APRIL, 2016

Use of Hindi Language in Courts

t880. SHRI RAM TAHAL CHOUDHARY: SHRI LAXMAN GILUWA:


(a) the details of provisions governing the use of language in Supreme Court and High Courts in the country;

(b) whether the Government proposes to review or amend the relevant provisions of the Constitution of India to allow and encourage the use of Hindi language in the proceedings in Supreme Court and High Courts;

(c) if so, the details and the present status thereof; and

(d) the steps taken/being taken by the Government to promote the use of Hindi language in these Courts?

ANSWER


(a) : Article 348 (1) of the Constitution of India provides that all proceedings in the Supreme Court and in every High Court shall be in English language until Parliament by law otherwise provides. Under Article 348(2), the Governor of the State may, with the previous consent of the President, authorize the use of the Hindi language or any other language used for any official purpose of the State, in the proceedings of the High Court having its principal seat in that State provided that decrees, judgements or orders passed by such High Courts shall be in English. Section 7 of the Official Languages Act, 1963, provides that the use of Hindi or official language of a State in addition to the English language may be authorized, with the consent of the President of India, by the Governor of the State for the purpose of judgments etc. made by the High Court for that State.

(b) & (c) : Government had taken up with the Supreme Court of India the proposals of the Governments of Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka seeking consent of the President of India for allowing regional languages in the proceedings of their High Courts. However, the Full Court of the Supreme Court disapproved these proposals.

(d) : The provision of optional use of Hindi in proceedings has already been made in the High Courts of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar.

:G1)\Jll!!f\i?jSt1~~r1r o:;:: 'liMID~&

MINIST!RV ({)~ ll1<\w'J 3, Ji!JJSiilC!i::

(IOEiPA,RT~Jlll!l'l"iT' 0? ~nJ.fi>"rlCE)

!!.;, 1!) ~~ $ &4. IB M t:\ ~'}1't:\iR~ll!rD 1t11ilJJ!.1,;;S7HllN ii''il'O. 'l 77 .

:l!l H iR I iK ilJJ U'~~ig Jb\IR IB !Fi;~u2l.ci\\ T ~ i<J :D ~'\~

:S iFU'.l.D M ilJJ lbi~fi:\ l?I? £;\ !htL;\i' ~ii.M 14'Cif3 &\N !3 lfi\1'1 IM:

t(.n} the clertails o·f fa$·~ il:rae!·" !Cco~ail'is i•m~Umi!~g i!-1 the co!!rnlltgy, ©~811:®0

wise;

:(~;) the nu!fl·abea· <i:rl •cas®<i ~m0p©;lHli!'.l @·'!I €:!M:rfan~ 1l3H: ias·~ tihn'®'" ye'l'1u'2> m<·cl

me numbe:r "* ca£Pil§ i::i;·e;ae~1l\l:!y GJeni'll'"~ h] ·Uu®'Bl!l .co<Urh:i, 'i'!kn'l».B,

wise;

(;;;) the total fum:ls £li!,1::lc.,rte~~ ao'ild spei'il\i: f©i' seUb1g up of tlleS'liJ ~>M~r:i:s

clul'h1g each of the !<l'm·~ Uw,2l'1'l yc@a!'5 «iti©l th•<:! <::IY!!'!'<ll'l'k yea•'; a11Hl

.1_,1''.l. ,. ... ,,,. .... ,. -~~ t~'~ "'.'011w(•rV,,NN' ·cw··,,.,, •. "=~·~ ·'-,A ~~-· ""'~ fr'OA»·~ "'~-"· Jl'i']"·'J ,(__j ~<L!lll"G=LifJ..,-..~ t11!"9 ~-.>'bi'~ 1•1lli·1•=~<1:'. ~'1!\! :i'"-"#•'Jl'=~ 11,y .;;J%''t. 'h'l~ a!la\\J'~'J£7 tl-oJ:':l~'I. • '<".~._.,, ..• ,

AMS'!J\VER

MDli'aiSTE!re Oil' LA'!JIJ & JUSTICE (SH!fU lrJoVo SAOA~~A!l•U:H:~ GOV'J[))A)

S''!\i;\'f~IMEH'lT. R!EfiEh'1!'~iE:G TO 1~.J IR!Ef.01. y ·ro (i1) 'TO {rl) <Ql[f' LOH S1\BiFU\

STl\RiRl!!D QUIES'fDON MO,·! 77 i:'~rOfR 5rn M1'.';. Y, 20'113 !R!E•GJc\Ri!Jlii'Hll f $\S"tr

TRACK COURTS

(a): Setting up of suboirdinate co1.1rts including Fast Track Courts (FTCs)

is the r@s[iJonsibi!Hy of ·tlhl&. State G~vernmea1ts In c<msultation \Vlth !Hi:!Jh

Coan-ts· fro111u th«iiw ow11 wes<n.11rces, bi its jisdgment ii1 Brij Mohan Lal &

Ot&uern v/s U11Jion of ln1Ji.;1 & Otihll!ll'S cm '19.04.2012, :6Mp:reme Court has

enu:l•0>rsed the positii:m o\1 :Gover111me1'it o·f hu~!a tlhl;;rt cotitunuation of f"i'Cs ' is "vithi11 the d@mah1 o·{ the States m11d has diirected the St~rtes that they

nee©l to decide either ·to i~n·i91a the Fas'~ Trac~' CoM1rts scheme to an en~J m·

t@ co~1tiin11e the same £is a ~J®.i'i1l1lanen'I: lieati,me ill'! the Sta·te. A IUMfiil'llb•err <IJ'f

reso!.!lrces. A sta'!:em®nt i:11u;licatii'lg State-wise number of fast Traci·~

Co!,.~li'ts reported f1.nu::tioinai is emc!osed as t.\nnexure·O,

(~J): huf©rnr11~rtiorn is i'H:l'.!: mai1Utail!'le<cil ct;mtiraliy. Mmivevei·, as pel' tl'le

ill'lforrmation available, cas·®§ disp@se{ll all'ild pendii'lg ill'il fast 'Tira.cl<: Coui'l:s

is enclosed at Annrexull'e·iB,

(c) & (d): An amount o·if IR!>.870 crores approximately "vas rel•eased ·to ·the

State Governments fon· Fas~ T1·ack Courts drnring a period of 11 years

upto 2010-2011 · and centrai f~mding was disccmtinwerpJ beyo11d

31.03.2011. The Central §'Jll'ants rel.e:!'ised to the States for Fast Trac~1:

Co1Jrts from 2000·2001 to 2010-2011 is given at Ann~:urnirre-111. As such,

no central funding V'Jas provided for Fast Track Courts d1Jri11g ·the last 3 . ' years. However, the Cei1ltral Government decided to provide funds upto

' a maxirrm.1m of Rs.BO crrore per annum cm a matching basis upto

31.03.2015 ·from the 1131h Finance Commission Award i'or meeting

expenditure 0111 salaries of the 110% additional positions of Judges being

created in the subordinate Judiciary following the direction of Supreme

Court in the case ·of B:rij Mohan Lal Vs, Union of India, The State

Governments and Chief .Justices of the High Courts were requested to

utilize these positions for creation of FTCs also.

· The 11th Finance Commission had recommended a scheme for

creation of 1734 Fast Track Courts in the country for disposal of long

pending cases and the cases invo8ving undertrial prisoners. The scheme

recommended by the 11'" Finance Commission was for a· period of five

y,Bn'm iip·to :2004·05. 'flhe Gov1~nunen1: a.ccnnled its .np~n·ovHl for ·~he

corrtin1)J:B'lfon of ce~l<h<J! ·hmd~"!J ;::i:f ~i 5132 Fast Ynach eonr~s ·Hnff1: weil'e

ope!l'atiorrn1i as on 31.3.2005 for a furthe:r period of 5 yeiws i.e. up to 31 5'

March, 20'10. The scheme was contini1EHifor anoi:he1· one year upto 31 51

March, 2011, a111d central funding for these FTCs has been discontinued

wi'th effec1t from 1st April, 20'M.

1'1H~ 14"' ll"ill'larnce Comtu1issi•0n G~as endors•ed the proposal to

sil:re11~tbe~1 th·111 j~1<ll'!Hci,;:ill system in States whi,r,:h ill'lch1des, inter·aiia,

es'tablishh~g 1800 IFO'Cs ·~or a peu'i!llld of five yeaJ"s ·1or cases o·f he~i'l(l)~!S

crimes; cas@s im1©l11ill1l~J se11ior citi.:i;ms, irv©men, ehildi'en, disabled a~1©l

litigai'ilts affected 11viU1 lf!DV ,t\llOS mud oti1e1· tenniwEil a!Dmen·ts; mi~i civil

disputes im1oivi1<ag i@mtl IJEJC©J~iisitkm a1ul pi·ope!l~lf/iren~ dis11mtes p,;mdh11;9 . ·for more than fh1® years b1i: a ,.~ost of Rs.4·t44 Ci'©[(e, 1'he 14th flliulli'!C®

Commissioll'i has mrged State Goveniments t@ m:i® the additional fiscaD

Sf}ace pirovided by the [email protected] it• the 1:"13{ deveOutio•l 'I:© meet sue!1!

requirements,

An:nexur-e-:1

Statement referred in reply to pairt (a) of lok Sabha Starred Question

No.177 for 5.5.2016

SL. No. Name of the State/UT No. of As on FT Cs

functioni n'1

1 Andhra Pradesh 34 Aug~ist,15

2 Telangana 38 August, 15 3 Arunachal Pradesh 0 March, ·14

4 Assam 0 July,15

5 Bihar 0 July,15

6 Chhattisgarh 0 Sept., 15 -~·- ---·-· --- -----

7 Goa 3 Jan.,16 8 Gujarat 0 August,15

9 Haryana 0 July, 15

10 Himachal Pradesh 0 August, 15

11 Jammu & Kashmir I 5 iJune, 14 12 Jharkhand 11 August,15

.

.

13 Karnataka 0 July, 15

14 Kera la 0 July, 15

15 Lakshadweep 0 October, 15

16 Madhya Pradesh 0 July,15

17 Maharashtra 80 July,15

18 Manipur 2 July,15

19 Meghalaya 0 July,15

20 Mizoram 0 July,15

21 Nag a land 2 August,15 '

22 Odisha 0 Feb., 16

23 Punjab 2 October,15

24 Puducherry 0 July, 15

25 Rajasthan 0 · Sept., 15

26 Sikkim 1 July,15 •

27 Tamil Nadu 0 Oct.15

28 Tripura 0 July,15

29 Uttar Pradesh 0 Sept., 15

30 Utlarakhand 0 July, 15 31 West Bengal 88 Nov.15

32 Delhi 15 Nov.15

Total 281

• Not notified but functional

Annexure-Il

Statement referred to in reply to Part (b) of Lok Sabha Starred Oues.!i.on No.177 for 5.5.2016

STATEMENT OF NUMBER OF CASES DISPOSED BY AND PENDING IN FTCs

SI. .Name of the state/UT · No. of cases No. of cases As on No disposed pending in FTCs

of since inception by

FT Cs

I Antllira Pradesh 248457 17088 April, 14

2 Arunachal Pradesh 1660 25021 March, 11

3 Assam 72240 11858L Oct., 12

4 Bihar 159105 . 80173 March,. I I

5 Chhattisgarh 76575 18095 March,. J I 6 Goa 8590 1595 Feb., 14

7 Gujarat 434296 103340 Feb.,11

8 Haryana 33590 4769 Dec.,. I 0

9 Himachal Pradesh 47480 7171 Dec.,.12

JO Jammu & Kashmir I NA NA ---l I Jharkhand 87789 22238 March ,JI

12 Karnataka 184067 34335 Aug.,. I 0

13 Kerala 116843 18996 Aug., 13

14 Madhya Pradesh 317363 43239 Dec.,. I 0

15 Maharashtra 381619 41899 Feb.,. I I

16 Manipur 3287 225 Oct.,.12

17 Meghalaya 973 315 Oct.,.12

18 Mizoram 1635 233 March, 11 ~-

19 Nagaland 786 59 Oct.,. 12

20 Odisha ' 67700 5393 March,.12

21 Punjab .46347 12223 Dec.,. JO 22 Rajasthan ' 123024' 264Z3 March,. I I

23 Sikkim NA NA ---24 Tamil Nadu 371336 40621 Aug., 10 ·

25 Tripura 5591 221 March, 11

26 Uttar Pradesh 411658 53117 March, 11

27 Uttarakhand 103208 . 9518 June,,12

28 West Bengal 173299 29652 April, 15

29 Delhi NA 2028 ·May, 15

NA- Not available

•

Annexure-111

Statement referred to in reply to Part (c) aqd (d) of Lok Sabha Starred Question No.177 for 5.5.2016

Central Grants released to Slates for Fast Track Courts from 2000-01 to 2010-11

(Rs. In lakl1) .

Central Grant released by Department of Justice I •

SI. Name of t11e Released 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-1·1 Grand No state from Total

2000-01 to 2004-05' ..

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ·1 Andhra 2250.00 550.50 412.80 412.80 142.40 - 1096.00 4864.50

Pradesh

2 Arunachal 52.69 19.20 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40 143.89 Pradesh

3 Assam 530.10 128.00 96.00 96.00 91.20 96.00 96.00 1133.30 4 Bihar 4766.40 960.30 720.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 9326.70 5 Chhattisgarh 791.10 198.40 129.60 129.60 148.80 148.80 129.60 1675.90 6 Goa 125.10 32.00 24.00 24.00 19.20 14.40 24.00 262.70 7 Gujarat 3226.68 11062.80 1355.90 571.20 580.80 - 777.60 7574.98 8 Haryana J422.31 102.40 33.60 67.20 38.40 76.80 67.20 807.90 9 Himachal 108.59 57.60 43.57 0 38.40 43.20 43.20 334.56

Pradesh

10 .J & K 300.60 - - - - - - ' 300.60 11 Jharkhand 2319.30 569.80 226.00 190.17 249.60 196.80 192.00 3943.67 12 Karnataka 2431.80 595.40 610.80 230.40 182.40 446.40 441.60 4938.80 ·13 Kera) a 815.25 198.40 148.80 148.80 148.80 148.80 148.80 1757.65 14 Madhya 2223.90 422.50. 215.40 259.80 312.00 316.80 316.80 4067.20

Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 4352.40 1197.2Q 1101.60 782.40 417.60 412.80 537.60 8801.60 16 Manipur 90.00 12.80 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60 150.80 17 Meghalaya 90.00 19.20 14.40 0 28.80 - 28.80 181.20 18 Mizoram 90.00 19.20 17.68 14.40 14.40 14.40 14.40 184.48 19 Nagaland 54.90 12.80 18.18 9.60 9.60 9.60 9.60 124.28 20 Odis ha 1866.60 262.40 • 196.80 158.40 158.40 168.00 168.00 . 2978.60

21 Punjab 746.10 115.20 48.00 51.20 0 163.20 81.60 1205.30 22 Rajasthan 2238.05 531.40 753.64 398.40 398.40 398.40 398.40 5116.69 23 Sikkim 29.70 - - - - - - 29.70 24 Tamil Nadu 1151.90 313.70 235.20 235.20 0 470.40 235.20 2641.60 25 Tripura 73.80 19.20 3.80 0 0 11.56 . 0 108.36 26 Uttar Pradesh 6319.80 288.00 3075.69 495.52 1161.60 1161.60 1094.40 13596.61 27 Uttarakhand 1173.60 1549.80 216.00 129.60 0 - 99.62 3168.62 28 West Bengal 3972.60 761.80 571.20 571.20 571.20 571.20 571.20 7590.40

Total 42613.27 10000.00 10292.66 5719.89 5456.00 5613.16 7315.62 87010.60 ..

*Grants released to the States from 2000-01 lo 2004-2005 by Ministry of Finance




TO BE ANS\NERED 0!'1 THURSDAY, THE 05.05.20'16

Renaming of High Courts

t'l963. SHRI ASHOK MAHADEORAO NETE:


(a) whether the Government has taken any decision on the proposals for changing the name of certain High Courts in the country including Bombay High Court; and

(b) if so, the details and the present status thereof?

ANSVIJER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI D.V. SADANANDA GOWDA)

(a) and (b): The State Government of Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu have requested

for changing in the name of "Bombay High Court" as "Mumbai High Court" · and ·

"Madras High Court" as "Chennai High Court" respectively. These High Courts were

established under the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 and were named after the cities

where the courts were located. Both the cities of Bombay and Madras have since

been renamed as Mumbai and. Chennai respectively. Since, the Indian High C9urts

Act, 1861 has been repealed, central legislation is required for changing in the name

of Bombay High Court and Madras High Court which is at drafting stage.

***

/'

GOVEIRNMENT 0:1" IND!.i'.\

MINISTRY Of lA'liV & JllJS"ilCE (DEPARTMENT OIF JUSTICE)

LOK SABHA

.llJNSTARREIO QUESTION NO. 1940

Fast Trach: Court

1940. SHRI SAINIJAY DHOTRE:

SHIU l!'U--JARTR!JHAR! MA!HTAB: DR. UIOIT RAJ:

SHIU P.M:. BIJU:

Will the Minister of II.All'\/ AN!i:J JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whethe1· the Supren1·e Com1: of India has req!lllested the Chief

Justices of the ~!igh C<1J>1'1irts ·~o e1·eH:1te f£Jst Track Cou:rts (!"TCs)

in the country;

(lb) if so, the details thewe©ff alo1~g 11viUi ti~e n111mbe1· of f'fCs created i11 response thereto;

(c) whether the Go11errm1ent is satisfied with the performance of

the FTCs and if so, the details thereof ai1ld if 111<1:J>t, the reasons

therefor;

(d) the 11umber of cases filed/referred, disposl3d of and pending ii'll FTCs during each of the last there years, State/UT-wise;

(e) the nmnber of additional posts of judges created and filled up

in the subordinate judiciary in the country along with the

funds provided by the Government for the purpose during the said period; and

(f) the other steps taken/being taken by the Government to

improve the functioning of FTCs in the country?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE (SHRI D.V. SADA.NANDA GOWDA)

(a) to (c): 811 its jmfgment i111 Brrij Mohan Lal & Others v/s U115oa1 of ' . India J!, Others on 19.04.2012, s~ipreme Coul"t has endorsed ·the

posi·Uon of Government of India that contimiation of Fast Trac!< Courts

(~TCs) is witi'lin the domai11 of the States and has directed the States

that they 11eed to decide either to bring the fast Track Courts scheme

to atJ end or to c@rntni!lue the same as a permanent feahu·e ill the Stirrte. A l1li!Jlmbe1· of s·t'El~·es tmve contiirmed FTCs beyond 31.03.2011 with tl~<!lir cwt! res~mrces.

in the Con~ewence of Chief Ministers and Chief Jiustices held hi New Delhi oi'l '7th April, 2013, it was resolved that the St:El'te

Governments shall, in consultation witlil the Chief Justices oli the respective High Courts, take necessary steps to establish suitlllble number of fTCs relating to offences against women, chlltliroim, differently abled p®rsons, senior citizen;;;; and m·aa·ginalized sections of the society, and provide adequate funds for the purpose of creating and continuing them. Government has requested the State

Governments and the Chief Justices of the High Courts to implement this decision.

(d): lnformatio11 is not maintained centrally. However, as pe1· the

information available, cases transf~rred, disposed and pending !!'! !F:nst Track Courts is annexed.

(e) and (f): The 14th !Finance Commission has endorsed the proposal of

the Government to strengthen the judicial system in States which • includes, interr-alia, establishing 1800 'FTCs for a period of five years

for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens, women, children, disabled and litigants affected with HIV AIDS and other terminal ailments; and civil disputes involving land acquisition and property/rent disputes pending for mote than five years at a cost of Rs.4144 crore. The 14th Finance Commission has urged State

Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided by the Commission in the tax devolution to meet such requirements.

Annexur~

Statement referred to in reply to Part (cl) of Lok Sabha unstirred Question No.1940 for 5.5.2016

STATEMENT OF NUMBER OF CASES TRANSFERRED TO FAST TRACK COURTS (FTCs),

DISPOSED BY FTCs AND PENDING IN FTCs

SI. Name of the state Number of No. of cases No.of As on

No cases disposed cases

transferred to off since pending in

FTCs since inception by FT Cs

inception . FTCs

I Andhra Pradesh 265545 248457 17088 I April, 14

2 Arunachal Pradesh 4162 1660 2502 March, 11

3 Assam 84098 72240 11858 Oct.12

4 Bihar 239278 159105 80173 March. I I

5 Chhattisgarh 94670 76575 18095 March. I I

6 Goa 10185 8590 1595 I Feb., 14

7 Gujarat 537636 434296 103340 Feb.,11

8 Hary~na 38359 33590 4769 Dec.JO

9 Himachal Pradesh 54651 47480 7171 Dec.12

10 Jammu & Kashmir NA I NA NA

11 Jharkhand 110027 87789 22238 March 11

12 Karnataka 218402 184067 34335 Aug.JO

13 Kera la 135839 I 116843 18996 Aug., 13

14 Madhya Pradesh 360602 317363 43239 Dec.JO

15 Maharashtra 423518 381619 41899 Feb.I I

16 Manipur 3512 3287 225 Oct.12

17 Meghalaya 1288 973 315 Oct.12

18 Mizoram' 1868 1635 233 I Mareh 11

19 Nagaland 845 786 59 Oct. 12

20 Odisha 73093 67700 5393 March.12

21 Punjab 58570 46347 12223 Dec.JO

22 Rajasthan 149447 123024 26423 March. I I

23 Sikkim NA NA NA

24 Tamil Nadu 411957 371336 40621 Aug., 10

25 Tripura 5812 5591 221 March 11

26 Uttar Pradesh 464775 411658 53117 March 11

27 Uttarakhand 112726 103208 9518 June,12

28 West Bengal 202944 173299 29652 April 15

29 Delhi NA NA 2028 May 15

NA- Not available

(a)

(b)

(c)

(cl)

(e)



LOK SABHA


TO BE ANSWERED ON THURSDAY, THE 5th MAY, 2016

Registration with Bar Councils

2032. SHRI GAURAV GOGOi: SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : SHRI JYOTIRADITYA M. SCINDIA:


whether any cases of alleged irregularities in the various Judicial Se1vices Examinations held across the country have been reported during the last three years and if so, the details thereof and the action taken by the Government thereon;

whether the Supreme Court has urged the Government to introduce an entrance test for law graduates for their registration with the Bar Councils in the country;

if so, the details thereof along with the implementation status thereof;

whether the Government proposes to amend the existing provisions in order to make selection process of advocates more stringent in view of the cases of fake degrees and declining standards of legal profession in the country; and

if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER


(a) Grievances/complaints have been received from the general public . about irregularities in the Delhi Jutlicial Services Examination, 2014 and some instances of irregularities in the Judicial Services Examination in Rajasthan, Odisha and Punjab and Haryana. These grievances have been forwarded to the respective High Courts for action, as appropriate. The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court has informed that the alleged irregularities are unsubstantiated.

.. ... 2/-

2

(b) and (c) : No, Madam. However, the Supreme Court has referred petitions to a

Constitution Bench, inter-ralia, challenging the power of the Bar Council of India to ' '

conduct entrance tests.

(cl) and (e) : The Bar CoLincil of India, with, one of the objectives to identify the

fake lawyers practicing law, has introduced Certificate and Place of Practice

(Verification) Rules, 20·15. One of the aims of these Rules is to identify the

advocates registered with various State Bar Councils having fake degree and weed '

out such advocates and others who have left practice or doing any other

business/profession. Under the provisions of these Rules, there will be a verification

of details of an advocate enrolled in the State Bar Council, every five years. These

Rules are being implemented with effect from 13th Jan.,2015 and the last date for

submitting applications has been given as 30th June, 2016.

Documents

INDEX [doj.gov.in] · Desk Side 6. Question No.332 Unstarred 25.02.2016 The High Court and the Supreme Court Judges Amendment Bill, 2015 Justice-I 7. Question No.364 Unstarred 25.02.2016