351 Half-An-Hour [] Discussion 352

evening—and there is no restriction of We can continue the discussion holding jewellery. In any case, this Act has tomorrow. been followed more in breach than in observance. So, this Act being repealed is PROF. CHANDRESH P. THAKUR: I can welcome. The other measures, make a beginning today, Sir. complementary measures, should be THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI announced soon. Otherwise, today in the BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Now we wij] public the general impression is what Prof. nave the Half-an-Hour discussion. Further Thakur has just now said, that by repealing discussion on '.he Bill will continue this Act the prices will go down. But, tomorrow. Shri Virendra Verma. actually, the prices will flare up after the Bill is passed and there is no restriction on holding HALF-AN-HOUR DISCUSSION gold. So there is the danger that prices will flare up. On points arising out of the Answer given in the Rajya Sabha on the 17th May, 1990 The Deputy Finance Minister said that gold to Starred Question 223 Re. setting up is not an essential commodity and so he tried Benches of High Courts to say that Government is not so much worried about the price of gold. But I submit that gold prices have a bearing on a lot of other things, like foreign exhange, black- market in foreign currency, hawala rates, etc., etc. So, I feel that the Finance Minister should seriously look into this matter at his level only because, I can assure him that a lot of economists and bureaucrats are going to say "No". He will have to take saner counsel from Members across the floor like Mr. Salve, come to some firm conclusions and take some very bold and dynamic decisions. Thank you, Sir. THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Is it the consensus of the House that we continue the discussion and conclude it in half an hour and then take up the Half-an-Hour discussion at 6.30 because the Finance Minister...

6.00 P.M. SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, tomorrow. THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): We will have to consider the Half-an-Hour discussion also. After the Half-an-Hour discussion we can again continue this discussion. SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, Sir.

353 Half-An-Hour [28 May 1990] Discussion 354

355 Haif-An-Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussion 356

357 Half-An-Hour [28 May 1990] Discussion 358

359 Half-An-Hour [RAJYA SABHA] ^^ ^

SHRI PASUMPON THA. KIRUTTINAN (Tamil Nadu): Mr. Vice^ Chairman, Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity lb speak on the half-an-hour discussion.1! am also thankful to my hon. friend, Mr. Virendra Verma who has initiated this half-an-hour discussion. Before., this question, another question was raised by the hon. Member, Mr. Gopalsamy and myself on the 11th May, 1990. The right to speedy trial is one of the dimensions of right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. Unnecessary prolongation of trial for more than eight, nine or ten years without any fault of the affected person is a violation of the fundamental fight. This is an observation of no less a person than a High Court Judge. I am also one of the victims of this malady. My appeal has been pending in the Madras High Court for more than 15 years. The arrears of cases not only in the Madras High Court but also in the other High Courts and even in the Supreme Court are soaring to lakhs. So far as I understand, there are two reasons for this. One is due to a number of vacancies in the High Courts and number two is, due to lack of proximity to the common public. Take, for example, the Madras High Court. It is at present situated at such a place that it is not - easily accessible to the poor litigants from the southern districts -of Tamil Nadu. Madras is 719 kms from Kanyakumari district; 649 kms. frem Nellai Kattabomman district, 492 kms from Madurai and about 500 'kms from my own district, that is Pasumpon Thevar and Ramanathapuram. This me^ns the poor men and women are left beyond the reach of justice. They have been forced to spend their time, money and energy beyond their capacity. 361 Half-AnHour [28 May ]990] Discussion 362

Even after forty years of independence, the THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI common man who lives in the far-flung and BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Please remote area is put in the same tragic position conclude. at which he was left during the British rule. Whereas the pendency of the main casts in SHRI PASUMPON THA. the year 1979 was of the order oi 34,497, it KlRUTTINAN: I am concluding. Sir. Again rose to 58,864 at the end of 1983. Likewise, on 20th April 1984, the Southern Districts miscellaneous cases have also been mounting Lawyers' conference held at Madurai passed a up. As against 24,133 cases of this category unanimous resolution pressing for which were pending at the close of the year establishment of a High Court Bench at 1979, their number shot up to 44,102 at the Madurai. We have a strong case on this close of 1983. Thus the total number of both subject. We request the Central Governmepts categories of cases at the close of the year to avoid further delay. I know Mr. Dinesh 1983 rose to 1,02,966. Goswamr, the hon. Law Minister since . . I know his ability; I know his will power; I So far as the southern districts are know his straight-forwardness. So I request concerned, the total number of main and the haa. Minister and this. Govetamenx to miscellaneous cases pending with the High assure us that the Madurai Bench will be Court of Madras were 18,976 up to the year established... 1983. By this time, this figure could have further gone up. In view of this, there has THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI been a persistent demand for setting up of a BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): He has not taken note of your compliments. High Court Bench at Madurai. The general public, traders, businessmen, students, several SHRI PASUMPON THA. voluntary organisations, almost all political KlRUTTINAN: ...as early as possible, parties, the Bar and the Advocates without any further delay. Sir, Madurai is the associations of Madurai as well as that of the seat of Tamif culture. It is a very good city. Tamil Nadu State have been continuously All infrastructures have been created. Court demanding of the High Court, the Supreme buildings have been constructed. The High Court and the Central Government for early Court Bench can be housed in that new building. So I request the hon. Minister and setting up of a High Court Bench .at Madurai: This demand for a Bench of the High Court is the Central Government to have a Bench at a long standing one dating back to the year Madurai arid fulfil our long-standing 1968 when the Chambers of Commerce and demand. Thank you, Sir. Industry of Madurai and Ramnad presented a THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI memorandum to the then Prime Minister, BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Shri Jogi. Shrimati Indira Gandhi, urging the dire Three minutes. necessity for creation of a Bench at Madurai. SHRI AJIT P.K. JOGI (Madhya Pradesh;: The Jaswant Singh Committee which had You gave four minutes to them gone into the subject of creating High Court benches in different parts of the country has SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY also strongly recommended a High Court (Pondicherry): You are reducing one minute Bench for Madurai. The State Government of to every speaker. Tamil Nadu from the year 1968 have continuously been persuading the High Court SHRI AJIT P.K. JOGI: Mr. Vice- of Madras, the Supreme Court and the Chairman, Sir, Madhya Pradesh is the largest Government of to concede this genuine State of the country. It has an area of and propular demand. 4,43,446 sq. kilometres and in 1981 its population was more than five crores. In 1956, when the States 363 Half-An-Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussion 364

[Shri Ajit area ot the State and S. population of Reorganisation Commission re- 1.40.00.000 according to the 1981 Census commended the formation of Madhya which is about 28 per cent o'f the population Pradesh, five distinct regions were of the State. I would conclude by reading brought together and one huge State was what the Jaswant Singh Commission itself formed. And that is why, right from the said about the creation of a Bench. It said: beginning, right from 1956 onwards, the question of providing Benches to all these "For the foregoing reasons, we are of the distinct regions of Madhya Pradesh has been opinion tha; establishment of a Bench of ;he seriously considered. Unfortunately, the High Court for Chhattisgarh region at Fourth Report of the Law Raipur will tend io the convenience of a Commission submitted in 1956, the large majority of the people of the region Fourteenth Report of the Law including those of Basta/ region which is Commission and also in 1972 the High Court economically and educationally backward. Arrears Committee did not-think it proper that And the demand for setting up a Bench of any additional Bench, should be given to Madhya Pradesh High Court is a genuine Madhya Pradesh, But there have been and a long-standing \one of the litigant persistent demands from the Legislature, public of the Chhattisgarh area and the from the people's representatives and pendency of cases at the principal seat of from the Bars of various regions that High Court at Jabalpur is mounting up year additional 'Benches must be provided . to after year and mere increase of the judge all the distinct regions. My esteemed strength would not solve the problem of the colleague Mr. Suresh Pachouri has spoken at economically and educationally backward length for providing a Bench at Bhopal. That is sections of the populace in Chhattisgarh why while supporting the creation of a Bench region." at Bhopal, I would like to mention and emphasise the case of Raipur which ....and the cases going to the High would cover the entire Chhattisgarh Court from this region constitute- a region of Madhya Pradesh. Chhattisgarh region sizeable part of the institution at the High which comprises seven districts in three Court from the entire area under the divisions has an area of 1,35,194 sq. kilometres jurisdiction of that principal seat at which, I would like to mention, is Jabalpur, the only solution which we can bigger than 11 States of the country. It has suggest is the establishment of a a population of 1,40,00,000 and more, permanent Bench of the High Court at according to the 1981 Census which is Raipur." bigger than six States of the country. In the last Chapter of the Report, that is, That means Chhattisgarh, area-wise, is bigger Chapter 9, they have recommended than 11 States of the country and population- specifically: wise it is bigger than six States of the country and this area is so far away from the scat of the "Establishment of a permanent Bench High Court, Jabalpur, that one of the districts, of the M.P. High Court at Raipur with not Bastar, is more than 700-kilometres away less than four judges to cater to the needs from Jabalpur. Looking' to these factors, of the. litigant public of Chhattisgarh." creation of a Bench in Chhattisgarh was considered proper by the Jaswant Singh They have also recommended: Commission. They mentioned that the Raipur "As the establishment of a permanent Bench or the Bench at Chhattisgarh would Bench of the High Court is likely to take cover seven districts, an area of some time because of 1,35,000 sq. kilometres, which is about 30 per cent 365 Half-An-Hour [28 May 1990] Discussion 366

the procedures to be followed for that demands of the various States. One of the purpose, the Chief Justice may take action criteria to be followed by the Central under section 51(3) of the State Government is the pendency of cases which Reorganization Act, asking four of his have not been disposed of The other criterion companion Judges to sit at Raipur to is the proximity of the High Court to the exercise jurisdiction in respect of cases people of the State. And, Sir, the third arising in the afore-mentioned seven criterion is the economic condition and the districts." backwardness of the area in which the people are living. These are the three criteria on the basis of which the Centre has to consider the Sir, 1 would try to be brief. I would like to demand. At the moment, the State plead that Jaswant Singh Commission had Governments are approaching the Central examined the entire issue in its totality. They Government. Commissions are appointed and had visited all the places; they consulted the these Commissions give their findings and the concerned people; they took evidence; they Central Government keeps the reports of consulted the Supreme Court Judges and the these Commissions safely without High Court Judges; and they implementing them. This is the state of affairs prevailing in our country. Assurances have been given on the floor of the House and also consulted the Bar. Then they came to the to the people. But they have not been conclusion that a Bench must be established implemented at all. in Chhattisgarh. This is a very genuine case. It relates to the most backward and tribal areas of the State. It has a very large These demands have been raised by various population and it has a large area. Therefore, Members here. Mr. Kiruttinan has mentioned a Bench must be established at Raipur. Thank about the setting up of a Bench of the Madras High Court in Madurai in Tamil Nadu. This you, Sir. demand has been there for more than fifteen years. A large number of cases are pending in the Madras High Court. As per the 1989 THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI records, 3,25,636 cases are pending in the BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI: Now, Mr. Madras High Court. Writ peftitions filed in Narayanasamy. Please be brief. 1980 have not seen the light of day till today. First appeals, second appeals, criminal appeals—all are pending there. But the clients SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY: Sir, I will do not know what will be the fate of their be very brief. cases. I was told that some of the posts of Judges in the Madras High Court have not Sir, I am thankful to Virendra Vermaji been filled, about four or five vacancies have who has raised this very important issue, that not been filled and this is still pending. is, the demand from the various States for setting up of High Court Benches in various places. Now, the demand made by Shri Kiruttinan is for the setting up of a Bench at Madurai in Tamil Nadu. This is essential and this has Sir, the States have demanded that there been demanded by the people of the State. A should be Benches of the High Courts in the Bench of the Madras High Court at Madurai district headquarters or in some important can places of their respective States. But the Central Government has to see this isste in a broad-based manner and consider the 367 //"'/ An Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussio it 368

Sh. V. Narayana Swamy] cater to the needs of the southern part of the State.

As i? Pondicherry is concerned, which resent, I would like to say one thing. Delhi is a Union Territory and there is a High Court. Goa had its Judicial Commissioner's Court though it is not there now. It has been abolished and Goa is attached to Maharashtra. But we in Pondicherry have been demanding a Judicial Commissioner's Court there. Our Government has sent its recommendation and it is pending with the Central Government. I would like to know from the honourable Minister whether he agrees to the proposal to set up a Judicial Commissioner's Court in Pondicherry. A large number of cases, are pending and for the convenience of the litigant public, I want a Judicial Commissioner's Court to be set up in Pondicherry. Thank you. Sir. THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Now, Dr. Ratnakar Pandey. Please be brief because there are many speakers. This is the Council of States «-:nd so, I am trying to give chance to every State.

369 Half An Hour 128 MAY, 19901 Discussion 370

371 Half An Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussion 372

374 373 lJaif An Hour [28 MAY, 1990] Discussion

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI 375 Half An Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussion 375

BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): Dr. J.K. State, we had only 9 districts and we had a Jain. Not here. Shri Gopalsinh Solanki. High Court. Then ten districts have been SHRI GOPALSINH G. SOLANKI added with a distance of 600 or 700 miles, (Gujarat): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, I would and the Benches have not been established. like to submit to the Government, through Sir, there is a long-pending demand for your honour, that the High Courts which have establishing a Bench in Dharwar in the been working since long, were introduced northern part of the State. It was earlier in the after Independence. But the Benches have not Bombay Presidency. Sir, districts of four been increased since then. The litigation has States have joined our State—four districts of grown ten to twelve times throughout the Bombay, four districts of Hyderabad, nation. The pendency has also grown in the Mangalore and the independent State of High Courts like hedges and there is no Mercara and then Bellary. All these States disposal of cases. have sent their districts to include in Karnataka, but no Benches have been So far as Gujarat is concerned, I would like bifurcated or established. So, Dincsh to submit that Panchmal, Baroda, Kheda, Goswamiji knows it very well, and there are Sanbarkanta, Baroch and Surat are backward reports of the Commission. I know his areas where adivasis are living. Rajkot is also constraints also. But if the mind of the at a distance of 300 kilometres. In between Government is to take justice to the doors of these, there is only one High Court at the litigants, and if you arc working in that Ahmedabad. I would like to submit that two background, since justice delayed is justice Benches, one at Baroda and another at denied, I request the hon. Minister to consider Rajkot, may be introduced so that the litigants the demand for establishing a Bench in are very much facilitated. Not only that. They Dharwar, bifurcating the Bangalore High will have quicker justice. At present, there is Court. delay of justice in Gujarat also like in any State of India. Many cases are pending. That THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI delay is nothing but denial of justice. So, BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI) : Hon. these two Benches may be created. Thank Minister. you. SHRI VIRENDRA VERMA : Every SHRI H. HANUMANTHAPPA Member of the House requests for setting up (Karnataka) : Sir, when all the States and all new Benches for the facility of the litigant my colleagues are demanding Benches, I also public. thought that I should also demand. Sir, if we THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI are working in the background of taking BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI) : The justice to the doors of the litigants and reduce Minister will take note of it. the pendency in the High Courts and the SHRI VIRENDRA VERMA : It is a Supreme Court, we have to find a way out to unanimous demand of the House. take the Benches to the doors of the litigants (Interruptions) and to increase the number of Benches. I respectfully disagree with Mr. Panwar and... THE MINISTER OF STEEL AND THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI MINES WITH ADDITIONAL CHARGE BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI) : The whole OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND House disagrees with him. JUSTICE (SHRI DINESH GOSWAMI): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, SHRI, H. HANUMANTHAPPA : Sir, one I important aspect is that in 19S6 the States am grateful to Mr. Verma for raising this have been re-organised But in my issue and for the views that have been expressed by different Members. All the Members have asked for Benches, and one dissenting voice has come from Mr. Panwar. 377 Half An Hour [28 MAY, 1990] Discussion 378

SHRI VIRENDRA VERMA: An ad- to the recommendations of the Chief Justices vocate. of High Courts and of the Chief Justice of SHRI DINESH GOSWAMI: In this debate India. I had publicly announced and I am itself or in this discussion, Benches have been prepared to announce even today— that I demanded for , Agra and Gorakhpur would not recommend for appointment as a and pandcyji has demanded one Bench in High Court judge any person unless the Chief each Commis-sionerate in — a Justice concurred with the recommendation. Bench for Madurai so far as Madras High In spite of the fact that there were so many Court is concerned, and for Bhopal and changes in Government, so many changes of Raipur in Madhya Pradesh, a Judicial Governors, or, even of Chief Justices, during Commissioner's Court in Pondicherry, for these six months, I personally feel that I have Purnea and Darbhanga in Bihar for Siliguri in done a good job. I enquired as to the largest West Bengal, for Rajkot and Baroda in Gu- number of appointments that had taken place jarat, and for Dharwar in Karnataka. So, in a year. I was told that the figure was before coming to the Benches, I would like to around SO, or slightly on the higher side. But first deal with one point which has been I would like to point out that in these six raised regarding the filling up of the months— in fact, not even six months have vacancies in the High Courts. Nobody is gone by— we could fill three vacancies in the more concerned than me for filling up these Supreme Court. There were five acting Chief vacancies. In fact, immediately after taking Justices in different High Courts, we could office, I took necessary steps to fill up the appoint four permanent Chief Justices in four vacancies. The problem that I faced was that High Courts. Uptill now, 71 appointments arc the practice that we have followed so far, not in the advanced stages of processing. In spite by this Government, but by the earlier of the fact that in a year, appointments were Governments, was that whenever there is a not more than 50, within six months, wc have change of a constitutional functionary processed 71 appointments. I think, within a whether it is a chief Minister representing the short time, wc would be able to fill 78 vacan- State or the Governor or the Chief Justice of cies. the High Court, their comments on the re- More than this, in order to remove the commendations are asked for, and I feel that complaints of aberrations in the appointment it is a healthy practice. In fact, I took the of Judges, or, complaints of political highest legal opinion whether it would be influence, I have introduced a Bill in the Lok proper for me to act on the recommendations Sabha for constitution of a National Judicial which are before me in spite of the fact that Commission for appoim-ment and transfer of there is a change of a constitutional judges. The Commission will finally appoint functionary or changes of constitutional and transfer judges in the sense that the functionaries of more than one state. Government is normally bound to accept the I have been advised that it would be better Commission's recommendations. If the to follow the practice that has been followed government docs not accept, it shall have to so far. Now, in Many States, elections took give reasons as to why the recommendations place. Therefore, we had asked for fresh arc not accepted. But the government will recommendations. But I can assure hon. have no power, in terms of the Bill, to Members that it was not done with any appoint a judge unless the name is political motivation. It was done to fulfil the recommended by the Commission itself. I constitutional obligation. I would also assure think, because of the paucity of time, wc may hon. Member that in the matter of not be able to pass it in appointment of judges, we are giving the highest priority 379 Half An Hour [RAJYA SABHA] Discussion 380 this Session. I hope, when this Bill comes up through this discussion today. Different before the other House and in this House, I groups and delegations have also met me, one will have the support of all sections of the pleading for the bench to be constituted at House. Meerut and the other at Agra. Coming now to the question of constitution SHRI VIRENDRA VERMA: I favour of benches, Mr. Panwar expressed his both. opposition to the constitution of benches. This SHRI DINESH GOSWAMI: I have written has been the view of the Law Commission, to the chief Minister stating that we want a the High court Arrears Committee and even definite view from you, where you want the of the Chief Justices. .Reference has been benches to be constituted, but the definite made to the Law Commission's Fourth and views have not come, may be, because of Fourteenth Reports in 1956 and 1958 and, the various reasons. I am conscious of the fact High Court Arrears Committee in 1972 and that the Allahabad High Court is opposed to the Chief Justices' Conferences of 1979 and the constitution of the benches. Even then, 1985;. they have not really encouraged the the moment I got the definite views from the creation of benches. But knowing fuMy well Chief Minister, I can take my own decision in that, today a large number of cases arc the matter. I have written letters to the Chief pending in the different High Courts, and Minister in January 1990, February 1990 and conscious of the fact that justice should reach March 1990. The hon. Chief Minister has the doorsteps of the common man, the written back to me that the matter is very government is prepared to constitute benches. important and serious and the possibility of I can take this House into confidence that emotional reaction persists. He has further after I assumed office, we have been able to expressed that the question, whether the State constitute a bench; of course, in my own Government should form its opinion at this region, in ltohima. Within a very short time, stage or should give an opportunity to seek we are going to constitute another bench at solution for negotiations with the represen- Aizawal, Mizoram. But in all these cases, tatives of different sections of the people where demands have been made by hon. should be considered in the context of other Members, the problem is not with the Central problems engaging the attention of the people Government. in the State and the country. Therefore, when The problem is that the other two he has himself referred this that the matter is constitutional functionaries which arc to be both serious and emotional, he has also consulted h;ivc not yet given definitive, views referred that the Government is considering in these cases. Let us, for example, come-to whether the Government should give its U.P. It has been so forcefully pleaded for a views at this stage or should give an bench for Mccrut by Mr. Vcrma. The Jaswant opportunity of seeking solution after Singh Committee recommendation was that it negotiations or whether it should be should be at Agra. After the Jaswant Singh considered after some time, these issues arc Committee report was received by the then engaging the attention of the State Government, it was forwarded for comments Government itself, I do not think that I can to different State Governments. Coming to take any decision. I would beg of the hon. U.P., this is the position. In spite of that we Members that they exercise their power over have asked for very definitive views from the the State Government and sec that definite State Government. Definitive views are not views are .given to us and 1 can assure them coming. I have even, after taking over, written that the moment definite views are received letters because there has been pressure, both by us, I will be the first person to take early through Parliament questions and action on the same. 381 Half An Hour [28 MAY, 1990] Discussion 382

So far as Madras is concerned, before we 30.5.89 and 5.9.89 ------and I have also constituted a bench at Madurai the High written to the Chief Minister on 18.4.90 Court should be satisfied that the necessary asking for his definite response. infrastructural facilities have been created for the bench. After the High Court writes back So far as West Bengal is concerned, I have to us, after inspection, that they have satisfied themselves that there are infrasturctural written to the Chief Minister and the Chief facilities, we can issue notification for Justice for their views. constitution of the bench. We arc enquiring from the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu I can assure this House that once these whether he has been able to satisfy the High definite views of the State Governments are Court regarding the infrastructural facilities. I received, I can take immediate decision. I am waiting for that response. When I get the would like to further assure the hon. Members response from the High Court that the that becasue such a very strong demand has infrastructural facilities arc available at been made in this House, I will again refer in Madurai, then at our level we can take a writing to the Chief Ministers. I will be decision. writing to the Chief Ministers of those States from which the demand has come in this House today, conveying to the Chief Minister So far as Karnataka is concerned. I have concerned the very strong feelings of the written to the present chief Minister on 27-2- house and urging upon him to send their 1990. He has informed me that the High definite views. I hope the hon. Members will Court of Karnataka is of the view that the appreciate that if the definite views do not establishment of a bench will lead to the come from the State Government, well, it is lowering of standard. The chief Minister has not possible for me to take a unilateral written to me that he has taken up the mater decision. In spite of the fact that Chief with the High Court and they are awaiting the Justices of almost all "the High Courts are response of the High Court. The against constiiu-tion of Benches, yet I can moment the take a decision considering the fact that today Chief Minister gets response and writes back the arrears have become one of the biggest to me, 1 can take a decision. problems, the fact that we must take justice, as far as possible, to the doorsteps of the So far as Madhya Pradesh is con people and the fact that States like Madhya cerned, earlier the Madhya Pradesh Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have very wide Government proposed the establishment geographical area, the population is of benches both at Bhopal and Raipur. increasing, peaple have become more Now the Jaswant Singh Commission, of assertive of their rights, more conscious of course, recommended Raipur. I would their rights and people are going to courts to like to make a small correction to my exercise their own right. Therefore, may be hon. friend, Mr. Pachouri, who said that even the Chief Justices decision may require a it was only in Madhya Pradesh that there fresh look and so 1 would only urge all the was no scat of the Court in the capital. hon. Members to please be in touch with their This is not correct. There are four respective State Governments and help us in States— Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Prad getting definite views from the State esh and Orissa ------where either the Government so that we can take decisions in principal seat of the High Court or the Bench the matter Thank you. is not in the capital. Again, in this case, my SHRI B.L. PANWAR: Will the Minister predecessors in office had written a number write to the Chief Minister of Rajasthan for a of letters almost at regular unified High Court and get his intervals. I can give the dates also ------on 21.9.88, 27.11.88, 12.1.89, 6.3.89, 383 Half An Hour [28 MAY, 1990] Discussion 384

Minister and the Chief Justice. comments bccasue 1 am in favour of a THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI unified High Court? BHUVNESH CHATURVEDI): The House is SHRI DINESH GOSWAMI: Mr. Pan-war's adjourned till 11 a.m. tomorrow. view is probably and isolated view here. Now The House then adjourned at I would not like to open a new arena of thirteen minutes past seven of discussion. I will only write about the the clock till clvcn of the clock Benches to them and 1 leave it to him to be in on Tuesdy, the 29th May, 1990. touch both with the Chief