Claims For Recovery Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Supported By Probable Evidence; Exaggerated Claims Unsafe: Kerala High Court Naib Tahsildar Performing Quasi-Judicial Duties Is A 'Judge', Protected From Disciplinary Action For Bonafide Errors: Madhya Pradesh High Court Purchaser Estopped From Refusing Delivery Or Payment Of Statutory Taxes After Participating In Machinery Trial Runs: Madras High Court Presumption Of Marriage From Aadhaar, Passports Is Rebuttable; Long Silence Dislodges Marital Claim: Kerala High Court Government Cannot Deny Promotional Benefits To Employee Who Assumes Charge On The Date Of Superannuation: Karnataka High Court Disproportionate Assets 608% More Than Salary Establish 'Proceeds Of Crime' Prima Facie; No Mini-Trial At Discharge Stage: Jharkhand High Court Decree Based On 'Evasive Denial' Improper If Defendant Raises Specific Defenses Going To Root Of Case: J&K & Ladakh High Court Trial Courts Cannot Adjourn Ad-Interim Injunction Petitions For Months While Ordering 'Urgent Notice': Andhra Pradesh High Court Agent Of Court Receiver Who Breaches Undertaking On Nature Of Business Not Entitled To Occupy Premises Without Paying Royalty: Bombay High Court Criminal Antecedents Of A Witness Do Not Operate As Disqualification, Testimony To Be Assessed With Caution Not Suspicion: Calcutta High Court Bar On Raising Benami Defense Under Section 4 Applies To All Suits Filed After 1988 Act, Even For Past Transactions: Allahabad High Court Article 21 Can Trump UAPA Bail Restrictions In Cases Of Prolonged Incarceration: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Activist Khuram Parvez Mere Possession Of Jihad Literature Not An Offence; Cannot Be Tagged With Terrorism Without Evidence Of Criminal Act: Telangana 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