2505 Travancore-Cochin [ COUNCIL ] Li'njh Court (Amdt.) 25C6 Bill, 1953
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2505 Travancore-Cochin [ COUNCIL ] li'njh Court (Amdt.) 25C6 Bill, 1953 Clauses 2 to 6, the Schedule, Clause 1, the Ernakulam there has been a grievance Title and the Enacting Formula were added to expressed by the people living in the the Bill. southernmost part of this area. I need not say that before the integration there was a High DR. K. N. KATJU: Sir, I beg to move that Court in each of the States. There was a the Bill be passed. Travancore High Court established in Trivandrum, and a Cochin High Court MR. CHAIRMAN: The question is: established in Ernakulam. Now, Trivandrum is absolutely down south, and the result is that, "That the Bill be passed." The following the establishment of the High Court at Ernakulam, the litigants in Trivandrum have motion was adopted. to come from their homes down south, up north to Ernakulam. This grievance was expressed very strongly in the State itself. As a THE TRAVANCORE-COCHIN HIGH matter of fact, the Government wanted to COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1953 bring legislation there, and it would have been passed in the State itself. But legal opinion THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS was taken and it was found that under our AND STATES (DR. K. N. KATJU) : Mr. Constitution any law relating to the Chairman, I beg to move that the Bill further reorganisation of the High Court or anything to amend the Travancore-Cochin High Court affecting the High Court must come under the Act. 1125, be taken into consideration. Union List and it is only Parliament that can pass the necessary legislation. Sir. I am afraid this might prove a little more controversial, though in my opinion it is The result of this Bill can be very briefly a very harmless measure. The House will stated. It only makes a small amendment to recollect that the State of Travancore-Cochin the original Act. Section 6 of the original Act, consists of two States and no more. At the which is a Travancore-Cochin Act, provides time of the integration there was some discus- that the High Court of Judicature of the sion as to the location of the headquarters for United State of Travancore and Cochin shall administrative purposes and as to the location sit at Ernakulam. Now, if this section were of the High Court. There was a good deal of allowed to stand as it is, the result would be discussion about it. and ultimately it was that the High Court would be incompetent to agreed, after an examination by a committee, sit elsewhere. The object of the Bill is to allow that the administrative headquarters, namely, the Chief Justice to establish what I may call a the Secretariat and the Legislature, should be Circuit Court, or a Division Bench, of such located in Trivandrum and the High Court Judges of the High Court, not exceeding^three should be located in Ernakulam, which used in number, as may from time to time be to be the capital of Cochin. That was done. nominated by the Chief Justice, to sit in Trivandrum and—I ask "Ron. Members to The maximum strength of the Travancore- note this—exercise, in respect of cases arising Cochin High Court is eight, but the present in the district of Trivandrum only—the strength is seven, one Judge having recently southernmost tip of the State and nowhere died. I suppose the place of the lamented else, the jurisdiction and powers conferred by Judge who passed away will soon be filled. the Act on a single Judge or7 a Division Bench of two Judges, as the Chief Justice may Hon. Members are fully aware of the determine. We are most anxious that the status topographical position of Travancore and of the High Court of Travancore-Cochin Cochin. I have got a map here. The State runs should remain unimpaired and that it should really from north to south on the west coast. continue to administer justice efficient- Ever since the establishment of the High Court at 2507 Travancore-Cochin L 9 APRIL 1953 ] High Court (Amdt.) 2508 Bill, 1953 ly and impartially as it has been doing. But it Ernakulam is a fairly central place; three has been found in many places that justice, if districts are to the north of Ernakulam, and it is concentrated too much in one place, gives three districts to the south, and the distances rise To inconvenience and expense. The are not long, and there is road transport, and House will remember that recently we have there will be a railway built. I submit, Sir, that passed orders to have a Circuit Court" estab- the Bill in its present shape will meet the lished in Delhi, and the result has been that the requirements of the situation. Chief Justice of the Punjab High Court appoints two Judges to come down to Delhi Sir, I move. and those two learned Judges hear and dispose of Cases which arise in Delhi. Similarly, in MR. CHAIRMAN: Motion moved: Uttar Pradesh they have got a Bench sitting at "That the Bill further to amend the Lucknow which disposes of cases arising in Travancore-Cochin High Court Act, 1125, Lucknow and some of the contiguous districts. be taken into consideration." In Rajasthan, the High Court sits at Jodhpur, but a Bencb sits at Jaipur. Therefore, for the SHRI M. MANJURAN (Travancore- convenience of litigants residing in the Cochin): Sir, I would oppose this Bill for the Trivandmm district, the provision is that the reason that it was a solemn undertaking at the Chief Justice shall send as many as three time of the integration of these two States and Judges—may "be one, may be two, just as the in the course of the various negotiations bet- exigencies of the situation may require—and ween the two States, that the High Court those learned Judges will sit there and dispose should be situated at Ernakulam and the of cases, with this restriction, that they will Ordinance of the Rajpramukh promulgated in dispose of only such cases which can be 1949 is to that effect. disposed of either by one Judge sitting alone or by two Judges sitting together. If any case Now, coming to the Bill itself, we find that requires the decision of what we call in the there has been a lot of talk abput it in the lower courts a larger Bench, namely, three Travancore-Cochin Legislative Assembly. Judges, or five Judges, then that case must go The Travancore-Cochin Government first to Ernakulam so that the whole High Court thought that it would be their responsibility to may. deal with it. That is the upshot of It." pass a Bill. Then it seems under better advice from the Government of India they thought Now, I have noticed that some amendments that that responsibility developed on the have been given notice of. It will be for you. Government of India. But the only article in Sir, to decide as to whether those the Constitution applicable to such matters is amendments, are in order. They really want to article 225 which states as follows: — turn the Bill topsy-turvy. Instead of leaving the High Court to continue at Ernakulam, the "225. Subject to the provisions of this harmless suggestion is made that the High Constitution and to the provisions of any Court should be completely transferred to law of the appropriate Legislature made by Trivandrum and that at Ernakulam there virtue of powers conferred on that should be a small Bench sitting. It is really a Legislature by this Constitution, the complete turnover of Rie position. I may say jurisdiction of, and the law administered in, that the Bill which I have introduced was any existing High Court, and the respective intended only to remove the inconvenience powers of the Judges thereof in relation to caused to the southernmost area. Otherwise, If the administration of justice in the Court, you look at the distances, and hon. Members including any power to make, rules of who come from that part of the country will Court and to regulate the sittings of the know, Court and of members thereof sitting alone or in Division Courts, 2509 Travancore-Cochin [ COUNCIL ] High Court (Amdt.) 2510 Bill, 1953 [Shri M. Manjuran.] shall be the same not meet with anybody's criticism for the entire as immediately before the commencement period of its existence. And the States of this Constitution:" Ministry's Report on page 1 states that there were And it seems that there has been some trouble certain difficulties with regard to the with theTlTentral Government because they formation of. Ministries in Travancore- have taken it as a matter coming within the Cochin and PEPSU and this really Union List under items 78 and 79 of that accounts for the whole trouble of the southern List. But it should be noted that these items parts. It was at the time of negotiations for the deal only with the question of constitution and coalition Ministry that the States Ministry gave organisation and not with the question it up as a concession to the Tamil Nad Congress of jurisdiction. This Bill actually people that a portion of the High Court involves the questions of.jurisdiction and would be , located at Trivandrum. It' was internal administration. It is a fundamental not because there was any public opinion about objection because unless article 225 of the it. Neither in the States Ministry's Report nor in Constitution is itself repealed, Parliament the Statement of Objects and Reasons is it does not obtain the power to make any given that there has been any agitation in that change in any of the existing High Courts as it behalf.