MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE
(SHRI KIREN RIJIJU)
(a) to (c) : Judges of the Supreme Court of India and High Courts are appointed as per the procedure laid down in the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) prepared in 1998 pursuant to the Supreme Court Judgment of October 6, 1993 (Second Judges case) read with their Advisory Opinion of October 28, 1998 (Third Judges case). As per MoP, initiation of proposal for appointment of Judges in the Supreme Court vests with the Chief Justiceof India, while initiation of proposal
for appointment of Judges in the High Courts vests with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court. Chief Justice of the High Court is required to initiate the proposal tofill up of vacancy of a High Court Judge six months prior to the occurrence of vacancy. However, this timeline is often not adhered to by the High Courts.
As on 14.12.2021, there is 01 post of Judge vacant in the Supreme Court of India and 404 posts of Judgesare vacant in the High Courts. Recommendations received in respect of 167 vacancies forappointment as Judges in various High Courtsare at various stages of processing between the SCC and Government whilerecommendations for 237 vacancies are yet to be receivedfrom the respective High Courts Collegiums. While filling up of vacancies in the High Courts is a continuous, integrated and collaborative process requiringconsultation and approval from various constitutional authorities, vacancies keep on arising on account of retirement, resignation or elevation of Judges.Government is committed to filling up of vacancy expeditiously in time-bound manner.A Statement showing details of vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts as on 14.12.2021 is at Annexure.
As per constitutional framework, the selection and appointment of Judges in Subordinate Courts is the responsibility of the concerned High Courts and State Governments.
(d) to (f) : Disposal of pending cases in courts is within the domain of the judiciary. No time frame has been prescribed for disposal of various kinds of cases by therespective courts. Government has no role in disposal of cases in courts. TheCentral Government is fully committed to speedy disposal of cases in accordancewith Article 21 of the Constitution and reducing pendency.
It may be mentioned that the pendency of cases in courts is not only dueto shortage of judges in High Courts but also due to various other factors like (i)increase in number of state and central legislations, (ii) accumulation of firstappeals, (iii) continuation of ordinary civil jurisdiction in some of the High Courts,(iv) appeals against orders of quasi-judicial forums going to High Courts, (v)number of revisions/appeals, (vi) frequent adjournments, (vii) indiscriminate use ofwrit jurisdiction, (viii) lack of adequate arrangement to monitor, tracking andbunching of cases for hearing, (ix) vacation period of Courts, (x) assigning work ofadministrative nature to the Judges, etc.
*****
Annexure
Statement referred to in reply to parts (a) to (c) of Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No.†3295 due for answer on 17.12.2021 regarding “Vacant Posts of Judges”
(As on 14.12.2021)
Court Sanctioned Strength Working Strength Vacancies
A. Supreme Court 34 33 01
B. High Courts
1 Allahabad 160 94 66
2 Andhra Pradesh 37 20 17
3 Bombay 94 60 34
4 Calcutta 72 39 33
5 Chhattisgarh 22 13 09
6 Delhi 60 30 30
7 Gauhati 24 24 0
8 Gujarat 52 32 20
9 Himachal Pradesh 13 09 04
10 J & K and Ladakh 17 13 04
11 Jharkhand 25 20 05
12 Karnataka 62 45 17
13 Kerala 47 40 07
14 Madhya Pradesh 53 30 23
15 Madras 75 60 15
16 Manipur 05 05 0
17 Meghalaya 04 03 01
18 Orissa 27 18 09
19 Patna 53 26 27
20 Punjab& Haryana 85 50 35
21 Rajasthan 50 28 22
22 Sikkim 03 03 0
23 Telangana 42 19 23
24 Tripura 05 05 0
25 Uttarakhand 11 08 03
Total 1098 694 404
Download PDF Files
