INCENTIVES FOR BETTER PERFORMING FAST TRACK COURTS
A Committee of Registrars
General of some High Courts and Law Secretaries of some States
met here yesterday to evolve a scheme for providing incentives
to States where the performance of Fast Track Courts is comparatively
better.
The Committee decided
that a lump sum incentive grant for the development of judicial
infrastructure should be placed at the disposal of the High Courts
of the first three best performing States. A token incentive should
also be given to each State wherein the performance is better
than the national average. It was decided that no monetary incentive
to individual judicial officers should be given. However, the
concerned High Court may consider commending their performance.
The performance in a State would be judged from the number of
Fast Track Courts set up and the number of cases decided, the
Committee averred.
It may be recalled
that 1734 Fast Track Courts are being set up since April 1, 2001
for expediting the disposal of more than two year old sessions
cases and cases of under trials who have been in jails for a long
time. Eleven hundred
and fifty (1150) such courts have been established and they have
disposed of 60,000 long pending cases, so far. The positive impact
of these courts on the crime scene is becoming visible in some
of the better performing States like Maharashtra and Rajasthan.
In addition, the Committee
deliberated on the policy for creation of additional judge strength
in the district and subordinate courts for clearing the backlog
of cases. The Committee was of the view that the judge strength
should be based on workload of pending cases. The workload for
district and subordinate courts can be categorized broadly into
sessions cases, other criminal cases, original suits and civil
appeals. Norms of disposal for each category would be worked out
on the basis of the last three years disposal. Judicial districts
where the disposal was better than the State average would qualify
for additional judge strength. Districts where the disposal rate
was lower than the State average would be advised to improve their
disposal of cases instead of seeking increase in judge strength.
The Committee, to
meet again on September 15, 2002 here for finalizing its recommendations,
includes the Registrars General of Delhi, Karnataka and Kolkata
High Courts and the Law Secretaries of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra
and Uttar Pradesh apart from the Joint Secretary in the Department
of Justice. The deliberations of the Committee started with an
opening remarks from the Additional Secretary (Justice) Shri Surendra
Nath.
