Chennai: With courts in the country sitting on a ‘staggering’ three crore pendency of cases, the Narendra Modi government is pushing hard to implement a new national litigation policy , which promises to filter out all ‘avoidable’ cases filed by or against state governments that needlessly drag on for years. The proposed policy is likely to come into force in 15 days.
This was revealed by Union law minister D.V. Sadananda Gowda while speaking at the 50th Lawyers’ Meet – 2015 on “Public Litigation Policy, Access to Justice and Environmental Law” organised by Bar Council of India in association with Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry here on Saturday.
Mr Gowda said the policy document was ready and undergone all necessary formalities like internal ministerial consultations and eliciting suggestions from all the stakeholders. “I will be moving a cabinet note shortly and within next 15 days national litigation policy – 2015 will come into effect”.
The minister agreed that all attempts to draw a plan to clear the pendency of cases had failed. The code of civil procedure that was amended with a single point agency to speed up disposal of cases had also fallen flat.
“I am confident that the new policy will bring some relief and reduce the burden on courts by constraining the unwarranted litigations”. The conference was attended by eight Supreme Court judges, who had all unanimously expressed their discontent over the nature of some of the cases being filed.
A Supreme Court judge, Justice Jasti Chelameshwar, said he personally dealt with a lot of ‘needless’ litigations. There were at least two SC judgments which said litigation between two government departments should be referred to a joint committee, not the court. However, most of the litigations land in court. S. Prabakaran, co-chairman, Bar Council of India, said two-third of the cases filed involved state departments.
Responding to the critical observations made by the SC judges, the Union Minister opined that an alternative justice dispensation mechanism like arbitration must be explored which costs less and delivers justice quickly. It is practically impossible for the courts alone to meet the demand for justice in a country with over 1.2 billion population. And, another factor was affordability. With 60 per cent of the population below poverty line, access to justice became a distant reality.
According to a research study conducted by National University students, three fourth of those who got harsh punishments like death penalty belonged to economically backward sections of society, which raised the question of affordability.
Mr Gowda said a three-pronged strategy should be adopted to ensure better deliverance. Firstly, avoid litigation, then evolve alternative dispute dispensation mechanism and then adjudicate quickly. He expressed concurrence to the view point of SC judge justice Kurian Joseph that a judge should not take more than three months to deliver judgment.
Work more to express your dissent, CJ tells lawyers
Chief Justice of Madras high court Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Saturday said lawyers should overwork to express their dissent, instead of abstaining from courts. Speaking at the Lawyers’ Meet-2015 here, Justice Kaul said in Japan the usual mode of protest was the factory workers work extra 15 minutes. “Likewise, the lawyers should work extra 15 days. Then, I guarantee the Judges will cooperate,” the Chief Justice said evoking peals of laughter.
“I have been appealing to the Tamil Nadu Bar Association and others wherever I go that for a professional the mode of protest should never be a strike. The Supreme Court had already observed it. There were other modes to express dissent. You (lawyers) are the people who express the dissent for the litigants. You are the agency to represent in the court. If you abstain from the court what will happen to litigants”, he said and added that both the Bar and the Bench should accept responsibility. The infrastructure and the benefits created for both lawyers and the judges was to ensure justice to people, who shouldn’t be traumatised by making them wait for years for justice, he added.
Manan Kumar Mishra, chairman, Bar Council of India (BCI), said the regulatory body proposed to set up committees at district, state and national level, which will look into lawyers’ problems and redress them at the earliest. “Lawyers are striking because their problems are not reaching the authorities. So, these committees will involve the authorities themselves”.
Supreme Court judges present on the occasion also expressed concern over the quality of legal education and said there should be a periodic review. Justice R. Banumathi, a Supreme Court Judge, appealed to the Central Government to extend budgetary support to BCI and the state bar councils to improve the quality of legal services. In response, Union law minister D.V. Sadananda Gowda said he will look into the suggestions made by the judges and lawyers.
‘Tamil in Madras high court under consideration’
Union law minister D.V. Sadananda Gowda said that the demand to make Tamil as official language in Madras high court was under consideration and there were similar demands from other states like Karnataka as well.
Speaking to reporters, he said a decision will be taken after consulting all stakeholders. Reacting to the controversy surrounding National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAP), he said the matter was sub judice and it would not be appropriate to make any comments. His ministry was working on renaming the Madras HC as Chennai high court and the announcement can be expected shortly, he said.
