JUDGE STRENGTH IN HIGH COURTS INCREASED
The Government has
decided to raise the Judge strength of High Courts to 749, which
is an increase by 94 Judges over the present strength. This increase
is more than those of 1995 and 1999 put together. The Judge strength
of High Courts has been raised by 131 Judges in the last five
years. The decision was taken following the just concluded comprehensive
triennial review of the Judge strength of High Courts, including
the three newly constituted High Courts of Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand
and Uttaranchal.
The first review
of Judge strength of High Courts was undertaken in 1995 and the
approved strength of Judges in 18 High Courts was fixed on the
basis of the revised guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court
of India. The approved strength on December 31, 1998 was 618 comprising
498 permanent Judges and 120 Additional Judges. After the triennial
review in 1999, the approved Judge strength was increased to 655
consisting of 514 permanent Judges and 141 Additional Judges.
The salient features
of the outcome of the latest review are:
- Six High Courts have normatively
qualified for increased Judge strength;
- Some High Courts have performed
well above the national average, but the strength is adequate;
- Some High Courts have not
qualified normatively for increased strength, their performance
being below the national average.
The Minister of Law
& Justice and Commerce & Industry, Shri Arun Jaitley,
has communicated the results of the review to the Chief Justices
of all High Courts on October 22, 2003 requesting them to forward
proposals for increasing the Judge strength through the Chief
Ministers of the respective States. He has expressed concern over
the continuing vacancies and has conveyed to the Chief Justice
that it hinders the administration of criminal justice system.
Shri Jaitley has also requested the Chief Justice of India to
advise the Chief Justices of High Courts to take immediate steps
for initiating proposals for the appointment of Judges of the
respective High Courts so that the large number of vacancies of
Judges in the various High Courts is filled up without any delay.
The Government
has taken a holistic view for fixing the judge strength in High
Courts with reference to the transfer policy of Judges, corporate
and taxation cases in High
Courts. Future requirement of judges of Madras High Court for
its Bench at Madurai (as and when it becomes functional) and liquidation
of cases transferred from the High Courts of Allahabad and Madhya
Pradesh to Uttaranchal and Chhattisgarh High Courts respectively
have also been taken into account.
While the strength
of Calcutta, Madhya Pradesh, Kerala, Patna, Orissa and Punjab
& Haryana High Courts is proposed to be increased by 13, 13,
11, 12, 11 and 13 Judges respectively, the strength of Allahabad,
Bombay and Madras High Courts will be increased by conversion
of posts of Additional Judges into permanent ones. In the case
of Chhatisgarh and Uttaranchal, apart from conversion of Additional
posts into permanent ones, two more posts of Judges each have
been approved.
In respect of the
Gauhati High Court, it has been decided to create eight posts
of Additional Judges. The approved strength of the High Court
in September 2008, however, would be 24 Judges irrespective of
the outcome of triennial review of Judge strength in 2006. This
decision was arrived at in view of the difficulties in meeting
the requirements of its six Benches and the impact on the Principal
Bench. The Bar in the northeast was greatly agitated on the issue.
There is also a proposal
to increase the Judge strength of the Delhi High Court by three
Additional Judges.
The Supreme Court
of India, in its judgement on October 6, 1993, had held that the
Judge strength of every High Court should be reviewed periodically
with reference to the felt-need for disposal of cases, taking
into account the backlog and expected future filing. The Conference
of Chief Justices and Chief Ministers held on December 4, 1993
to consider various measures for liquidation of the large number
of cases pending in Subordinate Courts/High Courts, had passed
a resolution that the Judge strength of the High Courts should
be reviewed once every three years.
According to the
guidelines finalized in 1994 on the recommendation of the then
Chief Justice of India, the required strength of permanent Judges
in a High Court is worked out by dividing the average institution
of main cases during the last five years by the national average
or the average rate of disposal of main cases per Judge per year
in that High Court, whichever is higher.
Similarly, the required
strength of Additional Judges in a High Court is worked out by
dividing the number of main cases pending over two years by the
national average or the average rate of disposal of main cases
per Judge per year in that High Court, whichever is higher. If
the average rate of disposal of main cases per Judge per year
in the concerned High Court is below even the national average,
then instead of increasing the strength, the concerned High Court
is required to take steps for improvement in the rate of disposal
of cases. If the average rate of disposal of main cases in the
concerned High Court is above the national average, then increase
in the Judge strength is considered.
Encl : 1
|
Sl. No.
|
High Court
|
Approved Strength
1992
|
Approved Strength
1995
|
Approved Strength
1999
|
Proposed Increase
|
Proposed Increase
2003
|
|
1.
|
Allahabad
|
77
|
77
|
95
|
--
|
95
|
|
2.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
36
|
39
|
39
|
--
|
39
|
|
3.
|
Bombay
|
60
|
60
|
60
|
--
|
60
|
|
4.
|
Calcutta
|
50
|
50
|
50
|
13
|
63
|
|
5.
|
Chhattisgarh
|
--
|
--
|
06
|
02
|
08
|
|
6.
|
Delhi
|
33
|
33
|
33
|
03
|
36
|
|
7.
|
Gauhati
|
19
|
19
|
19
|
08
|
27
|
|
8.
|
Gujarat
|
30
|
42
|
42
|
--
|
42
|
|
9.
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
08
|
08
|
08
|
01
|
09
|
|
10.
|
Jammu &
Kashmir
|
11
|
14
|
14
|
--
|
14
|
|
11.
|
Jharkhand
|
--
|
--
|
12
|
--
|
12
|
|
12.
|
Karnataka
|
30
|
40
|
40
|
--
|
40
|
|
13.
|
Kerala
|
24
|
29
|
29
|
11
|
40
|
|
14.
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
35
|
35
|
29
|
13
|
42
|
|
15.
|
Madras
|
32
|
42
|
42
|
05
|
47
|
|
16.
|
Orissa
|
16
|
16
|
16
|
11
|
27
|
|
17.
|
Patna
|
39
|
39
|
31
|
12
|
43
|
|
18.
|
Punjab &
Haryana
|
33
|
40
|
40
|
13
|
53
|
|
19.
|
Rajasthan
|
32
|
32
|
40
|
--
|
40
|
|
20.
|
Sikkim
|
03
|
03
|
03
|
--
|
03
|
|
21.
|
Uttaranchal
|
--
|
--
|
07
|
02
|
09
|
| |
Total
|
568
|
618
|
655
|
94
|
749
|
Note : Increase
of Judge Strength from 1992-1995 = 50
Increase of Judge
Strength from 1995-1999 = 37
Increase of Judge
Strength from 1999-2003 = 94 (proposed)
Encl : 2
Statement showing
the number of cases pending in each High Court
As on 31.12.2002
|
Sl. No.
|
High Court
|
Total No. of
Cases pending
|
No. of cases
pending over 2 years
|
|
1.
|
Allahabad
|
697995
|
549061
|
|
2.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
143460
|
082990
|
|
3.
|
Bombay
|
313916
|
222324
|
|
4.
|
Calcutta
|
299295
|
210988
|
|
5.
|
Chhattisgarh
|
34303
|
009151
|
|
6.
|
Delhi
|
111763
|
094799
|
|
7.
|
Gauhati
|
-
|
012357
|
|
8.
|
Gujarat
|
111169
|
064665
|
|
9.
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
17468
|
009151
|
|
10.
|
Jammu &
Kashmir
|
21474
|
008823
|
|
11.
|
Jharkhand
|
5480
|
007470
|
|
12.
|
Karnataka
|
104177
|
025596
|
|
13.
|
Kerala
|
182853
|
118138
|
|
14.
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
140156
|
074508
|
|
15.
|
Madras
|
185281
|
081117
|
|
16.
|
Orissa
|
102181
|
062693
|
|
17.
|
Patna
|
317584
|
108066
|
|
18.
|
Punjab &
Haryana
|
241851
|
169145
|
|
19.
|
Rajasthan
|
446773
|
50984
|
|
20.
|
Sikkim
|
261
|
00059
|
|
21.
|
Uttaranchal
|
31261
|
22198
|
| |
Total
|
3368621
|
2164182
|
