Subsequent Declaration Of Juvenility Does Not Vitiate Conviction On Merits: Supreme Court Borrowers Cannot Ignore Bank Accounting Systems And Suspense Accounts To Claim Arbitrary Reductions In Loan Dues: Supreme Court Re-employed Judicial Officers Cannot Claim 6th Pay Commission Scales: Supreme Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Erroneously Exercising Review Jurisdiction On 'Mistaken Notion', Restores Employee's ACP Benefits Trademark Infringement: Defendant Can Cross-Examine Plaintiff On Use Of Brand Name Even If Written Statement Is Not On Record: Supreme Court 'Interest And Welfare Of Child Would Be Best Served': Supreme Court Invokes Parens Patriae In Contempt Plea; Revokes Own Custody Order Mere Absence From MCA Records Cannot Absolve Accused Under Section 138 NI Act If Prima Facie Role Is Shown: Punjab & Haryana High Court Incomplete Or Defective Real Estate Application Cannot Claim Deemed Registration Under Section 5(2) Of RERA Act: Orissa High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Cannot Justify Invoking 'Organized Crime' Offence Under Section 111 BNS Without Fulfilling Statutory Ingredients: Madhya Pradesh High Court 'Testator's Character & Prior Gifts Justify Unequal Distribution': Madras High Court Upholds Holographic Will Minority Status Cannot Arrest Limitation Period For Appeal If Minor Was Represented By Natural Guardian In Original Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Admission Of Property Boundaries In Family Partition Deeds Destroys Coparceners' Claim That Land Remains Joint Ancestral Property: Karnataka High Court Mesne Profits Must Reflect Open Market Letting Value Rather Than Static Contractual Rates: Delhi High Court Law Graduates Who Fail To Clear AIBE Within Two Years Cannot Practice In Any Court, Tribunal Or Revenue Authority: Allahabad High Court Bombay High Court Slams 'Growing Tendency' To Bypass GST Appeals, Says 'Natural Justice' Not A Blanket Excuse For Writ Petitions Proportionate Cost Only Can Be Awarded On Decreed Amount, Not On Total Plaint Valuation: Kerala High Court

Supreme Court Mandates Expeditious Judicial Recruitment and Infrastructure Development Across States”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court of India has made significant strides towards addressing the longstanding issue of vacancies and infrastructural deficits in the judiciary of various states. The judgment, delivered on 30th November 2023, in Civil Appeal No. 1867/2006, focuses on the states of Jharkhand, Karnataka, and Kerala.

The apex court, comprising the Chief Justice, Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra, underscored the urgency of filling judicial vacancies and improving court infrastructure. The court observed, “The timely filling of vacancies and enhancement of infrastructure is not just an administrative necessity but a constitutional obligation to ensure the right to speedy justice.”

In Jharkhand, the court ordered the notification and commencement of recruitment for 18 vacancies for Direct Recruitment of District Judges and 12 vacancies in the Limited Competitive Examination. The court also emphasized the need for expediting the construction of court halls and facilities, calling for a high-level meeting involving state officials and the High Court’s Building Committee.

Turning its attention to Karnataka, the Supreme Court noted that 19 vacancies for District Judges and 107 for Civil Judges (Junior Division) needed urgent filling. The court also highlighted infrastructure concerns, including pending proposals and ongoing construction, necessitating immediate action from the state government.

Regarding Kerala, the court expressed satisfaction with the ongoing recruitment processes but stressed the importance of their completion within the stipulated timelines. Additionally, the court directed the resolution of issues related to the NOC from the Jail Department affecting court center operations.

This judgment comes as a response to the chronic understaffing and infrastructure shortcomings in the Indian judiciary, which have been impediments to the timely dispensation of justice. The Supreme Court’s directives are expected to significantly impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the judicial process in these states, ultimately contributing to the broader goal of ensuring justice for all.

The judgment, while focusing on administrative aspects, sends a strong message about the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the constitutional mandate of delivering timely justice. As the court poignantly remarked, “Efficient judiciary is the cornerstone of a robust legal system, and our efforts today are a step towards strengthening this foundation.” The decision has been widely welcomed by legal experts and is seen as a pivotal moment in judicial administration in India.

Date of Order: 30-11-2023

MALIK MAZHAR SULTAN & ANR. VS U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ORS

Latest Legal News