Now, fill the judicial vacancies with great speed
Now that the Supreme Court Collegium has cleared the contentious Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), the filling up of judicial vacancies in High Courts must begin in right earnest. The sanctioned number of High Court judges across the country is more than 1,000, but just about half that number is operational. Not surprisingly, the large vacancies have impacted the justice delivery system and also put judges under avoidable stress. Chief Justice of India JS Khehar has rightly said that the immediate emphasis must be on filling up the slots, and that the issue of increasing the sanctioned strength can be taken up later. The Collegium has accepted the Government's contention that the latter must have the right to veto the name of judges if they are found to be a national threat following a security check. However, it's not clear whether the veto will hold or can the Collegium still insist on such names. Whatever, the fact that the MoP has been endorsed, means sticky issues can be resolved as and when they come up. Meanwhile, at least the vacancies can begin to be filled up. The MoP has had a turbulent past, and a positive twist came about with the arrival of Khehar as Chief Justice of India. Only in the recent past, he had indicated that communication between the apex court and the Government had reached a point from which the MoP would soon be a reality — and it has now. The issue had run into deep trouble during his predecessor TS Thakur's time. As Chief Justice of India, Thakur had on occasion berated the Union Government in an open court for delaying the appointment of judges by dragging its feet on finalizing the MoP. Unfortunately, there had seemed to be little meeting ground between the Collegium and the Government on the structure of the MoP. On another occasion, Chief Justice Thakur had broken down at an event in the Prime Minister's presence, pleading with the Government to hasten the MoP. But all that is past and now both the apex court Collegium and the Centre have to work in close coordination to clear the backlog.
Meanwhile, the authorities concerned must also give attention to the issue of case backlogs in the lower courts. After all, the trial courts are the ones where most of the disputes initially go and are adjudicated, and the vast number of backlogs rests with these subordinate courts. According to a National Judicial Data Grid figure, the pendency of cases in district courts is 2.7 crore; and 10 per cent of it has been pending for over a decade. This is indeed a sorry state of affairs. It is common knowledge that the lower courts struggle with not just large vacancies but also poor infrastructure in terms of buildings, technology etc. Besides, allegations of wrongdoing on the part of the judicial staff are also the most common at this level. Real reforms in the justice delivery system must necessarily revamp the subordinate judiciary.