Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras 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