All India Judges Asson. and Others vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Justice Delivery System is the bedrock of the rule of law, which is held to be the basic structure of the Constitution and it is our view that, in the absence of adequate judicial infrastructure, particularly for the subordinate Courts, it would not be possible to sustain rule of law in this Country. It is true that Courts do not generally issue directions in financial matters, however, we are of the view that Court fees, costs and fines constitute what is called "Measure" of what is spent on judicial infrastructure. This would be in consonance of doctrine of Proportionality, which is the facet of doctrine of Reasonableness under the Constitution. Rule of Law assures the citizen of an effective civil and criminal justice system and judicial infrastructure is the cornerstone of justice delivery system without which Rule of Law in this Court would fail.

In the light of what is stated above, this Court undertook the exercise of ascertaining and obtaining information regarding infrastructural projects concerning Court houses and residential quarters of Judges working in the subordinate judiciary. Accordingly, vide Order dated 12th July, 2010, read with Order dated 19th July, 2010, we called for information regarding projects which are in the pipeline. Some of the States have given requisite information in that regard.

To begin with, on the basis of the information furnished to us by the learned Amicus Curiae and by the Monitoring Committee of this Court, we have decided to examine the position of infrastructure in the two States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

We find from the statement submitted by the State of Karnataka, through the concerned Committee, that as far as Court houses are concerned, 414 projects [Column No. 12] are in the pipeline, whereas for residential quarters, 282 projects are pending clearance. Similarly, in the case of Andhra Pradesh, 22 proposals [Column No. 12] are awaiting clearance in respect of Court houses and 16 projects are awaiting clearance for residential quarters. We do not know the reason for such non-clearance. There are also projects where constructions have actually started. We do not know since when these projects are pending. In the circumstances, we direct the Chief Secretary of the State concerned to put on affidavit as to since when all these proposals/projects are pending and the reasons why they are not being cleared.

The matter shall stand over to 27th September, 2010.

T.I. Rajput, A.R.-cum-P.S.

Madhu Saxena, Assistant Registrar

Considering the Reports received from various States, it has been noticed that the information furnished by the District Committee(s) is not accurate in the case of existing Court houses and residential quarters in some of the States, like State of Tripura. We, therefore, direct the District Committees of the States that, while forwarding information in Formats 'A' and 'C', they should also submit brief Status Report as to the condition and facilities of the existing Court houses and residential quarters for the Judges of the subordinate Judiciary. This is in view of the fact that, in some of the States, the buildings are in a very bad shape and the District Committees have not given us accurate report as to the exact state of buildings housing Courts and residential quarters. In this connection, we want the Portfolio Judge as well as the Registrar General of the High Court concerned in each of the States to vet the Formats and Status Report submitted by the State Committee before forwarding it to the Monitoring Committee of the Supreme Court. If the Portfolio Judge finds that the Report of the State Committee is not accurate, the same will be returned to the State Committee directing it to submit an accurate Report.

The District Committees, which have already submitted information in Formats 'A' and 'C', shall also get the same vetted and a brief Status Reports be added thereto and be sent to the State Committees. The State Committees shall compile the information and forward the same [wherever required, revised information] in Formats 'B' and 'D' along with brief Status Report to the Monitoring Committee at Jaisalmer House [Department of Justice, New Delhi. The Monitoring Committee shall process the information, consolidate the same in appropriate charts and place it before this Court with it's Report(s). State-wise information in Formats 'A' and 'C' be also kept available for perusal of the Court.

The Secretary General of the Supreme Court will forward copy of this Order to each and every State as well as the High Court for necessary action.

The matter shall stand over to 27th September, 2010.

Vide Order dated 12th July, 2010, read with Order dated 19th July, 2010, we had directed formation of Committees which direction has still not been complied with by the following States: They are: Bihar, Goa, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Puducherry, Nagaland, Punjab, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand as also West Bengal.

In addition, we have not received information/status report concerning inputs on infrastructure from the following fourteen States: They are Bihar, Goa, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Puducherry, Nagaland, Punjab, Haryana, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Jammu & Kashmir and Jharkhand.

We want the above States to supply requisite information and take steps with regard to formation of Committees without further delay failing which this Court will have to summon Chief Secretary of the State(s).

I.A. No. 1 filed by the State of West Bengal stands rejected.

Place the matter on 27th September, 2010.