Budget Session – 3rd Session of WEDNESDAY, 18th MARCH 2020

INDEX

S.No. Question Question Date Subject Division Page No. Type Nos. 1. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Lok Adalats A2J/LAP 2-6 No.3934 2. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Holidays in Courts Justice.I 7-8 No.3947 3. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Disposal of Criminal NM 9-10 No.3971 and Civil Cases 4. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Tele Law Scheme A2J/LAP 11-12 No.3977 5. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Recusal by Judges NM 13 No.3980 6. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Judicial Panels Justice.I 14 No.3990 7. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Hardships faced by NM 15-19 No.4017 Advocates 8. Question Unstarred 18.03.2020 Collegium on Appointment 20-21 No.4038 Appointment and Division Transfer of Judges

GOVERNMENT OF MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPMRTMENT OF JUSTICE ****** LOKSABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO 3934 ,. TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18th MARCH, 2020 Lok Adalats

3934.DR. SHRIKANT EKNATH SHINDE: SHRI DHAIRYASHEEL SAMBHAJIRAO MANE: DR. SUJAY RADHAKRISHNA VIKHE PATIL: SHRI HEMANT SRIRAM PATIL: SHRI UNMESH BHAIYYASAHEB PATIL:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether Government has proposed to set up more Lok Adalats in the country to clear pending cases in High Courts and Lower Courts;

(b) if so, the details thereof along with the number of Lok Adalats presently functioning in various States;

(c) the number of cases cleared by the Lok Adalats during the last three years, State-wise; and

(d) the extent to which it has reduced the number of pending cases in High Courts and Lower Courts?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) to (c) Lok Adalat is an important Alternative Disputes Resolution Mechanism

available to common people. It is a forum where the disputes/cases pending in

the court of law or at pre-litigation stage are settled/compromised amicably.

Under the Legal Services Authorities (LSA) Act, 1987, an award made by a Lok

Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court and is final and binding on all

parties and no appeal lies against thereto before any court. In order to reduce the

pendency of cases in courts and also to settle the disputes at pre-litigation stage, Lok Adalats are organized by Legal Services Institutions at such intervals as it

deems fit. Lok Adalat is' not a permanent establishment. However, as per Section

19 of the LSA Act, Lok Adalats are organized by Legal Services Institutions as

per requirement. National Lok Adalats are organized simultaneously in all Taluks,

Districts and High Courts on a pre-fixed date.

In addition, Section 228 of the LSA Act also provides for establishment of

Permanent Lok Adalat by every State Authority to deal with cases of public utility

services at pre-litigation stage. 337 Permanent Lok Adalats are functioning in

various States & UTs. State-wise Permanent Lok Adalats and cases settled is at

Annexure-A. State-wise cases settled (both at pre-litigative stage and pending

cases) by Regular Lok Adalats and National Lok Adalats during the last three

years is at Annexure 8 and C respectively.

(d) During last three years, Regular Lok Adalats have settled 20,00,437 cases and

National Lok Adalats have settled 81,55,052 cases pending in High Courts and

Lower Courts.

******** 4 Annexure-A Statement as referred to in reply to the Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3934 for 18.03.2020 raised by Dr. Shrikant Eknath Shinde & Ors. -Lok Adalats A statement containing the number of cases settled in Permanent Lok Adalats (Public Utility Services) during the last three financial years 2017-18,2018-19 and 2019-20 (upto December, 2019) Cases Settled PLAs S.No SLSA 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 (upto Functioning Dec., 2019) 1 Andaman & Nicobar 1 1 1 0 Islands 2 Andhra Pradesh 9 1404 1805 1317 3 Arunachal Pradesh 0 0 0 0 4 Assam 20 312 99 34 5 Bihar 9 78 491 521 6 Chhattisgarh 5 163 122 67 7 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 0 0 0 0

8 Daman & Diu 0 0 0 0 9 Delhi 2 11922 18897 14376 10 Goa 2 93 107 57 11 Guiarat 4 439 365 110 12 Haryana 21 40966 39930 37213 13 Himachal Pradesh 4 75 70 95 14 Jammu & Kashmir 0 0 0 0 15 Jharkhand 24 3137 6414 8649 16 Karnataka 6 8673 4014 4547 17 3 818 544 298 18 Lakshadweep 0 0 0 0 19 Madhya Pradesh 50 12094 951 378 20 Maharashtra 4 10089 2981 2848 21 Manipur 0 0 0 0 22 Meghalaya 0 0 0 0 23 Mizoram 2 0 0 0 24 Nagaland 0 0 0 0 25 Odisha 18 1583 1352 1424 26 Puducherry 0 0 0 0 27 Punjab 22 19626 9427 6723 28 Rajasthan 35 3208 4423 4095 29 Sikkim 0 0 0 0 30 32 0 0 20 31 Telengana 6 4856 6243 2128 32 Tripura 6 49 245 177 33 Chandigarh 1 3205 1653 514 34 Uttar Pradesh 47 1663 2340 1007 35 Uttarakhand 4 5 151 282 36 0 0 0 0 Grand Total 337 124459 102625 86880 Annexure-B Statement as referred to in reply to the Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3934 for 18.03.2020 raised by Dr. Shrikant Eknath Shinde & Ors. - Lok Adalats. State-wise number of cases setted in Regular Lok Adalats during the financial years 2017-18,2018-19 and 2019-20 (upto December,2020) 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 (upto Dec., 2019)

Name of the State Disposal of Disposal of Disposal of Disposal of Disposal of Disposal of S.No. Authority Pre- Pending Pre- Pending Pre- Pending (1) litigation Cases litigation Cases litigation Cases Cases Cases Cases (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Andaman & 1 114 318 75 0 99 191 Nicobar Islands 2 Andhra Pradesh 2969 13243 2605 11126 1489 7547 3 Arunachal Pradesh 23 25 13 13 69 49 4 Assam 4072 105079 605 57673 644 32185 5 Bihar 2089 194 1171 190 810 122 6 Chhattisgarh 435 11013 602 5085 376 1119 Dadra & Nagar 7 0 10 2 3 0 0 Haveli 8 Daman & Diu 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 Delhi 3685 0 4393 0 12893 2333 10 Goa 226 397 21 111 51 29 11 Gujarat 3324 15750 843 17819 1099 15473 12 Haryana 20679 128849 0 143703 0 99466 13 Himachal Pradesh 99 52800 73 75107 0 60385 14 Jammu & Kashmir 1509 2976 3615 6996 1933 13189 15 Jharkhand 1592 6314 3563 8905 1574 4735 16 Karnataka 8426 105846 6335 83281 1870 28888 17 Kerala 18896 8142 25667 6065 12931 3594 18 Lakshadweep 13 0 198 0 0 0 19 Madhya Pradesh 2795 5082 603 2958 908 7561 20 Maharashtra 21 1096 9 789 1300 6592 21 Manipur 0 0 28 0 0 0 22 Meghalaya 0 10 86 80 0 0 23 Mizoram 498 28 411 66 288 110 24 Nagaland 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Odisha 176 267148 62 82655 22 36617 26 Puducherry 774 337 846 165 378 143 27 Punjab 871 6109 6216 23050 274 3572 28 Rajasthan 2462 70815 2373 8300 907 4322 29 Sikkim 292 385 577 152 313 123 30 Tamil Nadu 12666 6358 9413 7731 6030 5396 31 Telengana 3052 11383 3973 9059 4228 5597 32 Tripura 206 73676 331 56738 612 6475 33 Chandigarh 39 4 88 0 21 0 34 Uttar Pradesh 3639 5930 14437 27139 1467 1802 35 Uttarakhand 0 16868 4 7804 26 26001 36 West Bengal 888870 27985 285892 29762 7494 10126 Grand Total 9,84,512 9,44,170 3,75,130 6,72,525 60,106 3,83,742

Pending Cases settled = Col (3) + Col (5) + Col (7) = 20,00,437 Annexure-C Statement as referred to in reply to the Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3934 for 18.03.2020 raised by Dr. Shrikant Eknath Shinde & Ors. - Lok Adalats. State-wise number of cases settled in National Lok Adalats during the years 2017, 2018 and 2019. 2017 2018 2019 S.No. Name of the State Disposal of Disposed of Disposal of Disposed Disposal of Disposed of Authority Pre- Pending Pre- of Pending Pre- Pending (1) litigation cases litigation cases litigation cases Cases Cases Cases (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Andaman & Nicobar 1 288 825 0 0 0 Islands 0 2 Andhra Pradesh 28616 118949 28996 66021 8224 89191 3 Arunachal Pradesh 386 595 947 391 399 189 4 Assam 23521 35143 19841 11351 16434 5162 5 Bihar 190786 26614 151050 19933 144071 20913 6 Chhattisgarh 28971 17159 36340 34022 20762 36886 Dadra & Nagar 7 14 83 10 160 1860 161 Haveli 8 Daman & Diu 45 82 37 70 198 51 9 Delhi 6884 24514 12022 63524 28065 43312 10 Goa 1147 1319 1438 1266 456 1109 11 Gujarat 63637 132205 41818 95287 43469 149681 12 H~ana 29739 44326 32984 58157 40633 62665 13 Himachal Pradesh 2413 21183 4943 15355 10695 14737 14 Jammu & Kashmir 43631 31214 19312 40018 8944 23233 15 Jharkhand 51003 33084 47385 24673 33098 16130 16 Karnataka 26588 58682 14830 85127 32020 249829 17 Kerala 17510 21683 66208 39805 83528 45201 18 Lakshadweep 98 36 103 0 1 3 19 Madhya Pradesh 212237 121574 191949 118620 157676 76757 20 Maharashtra 356795 154554 660134 148491 334306 94070 21 Manipur 1802 167 1600 89 1917 77 22 M~halaya 941 962 447 489 409 286 23 Mizoram 977 22 1056. 20 470 25 24 Nagaland 283 182 2061 267 829 144 25 Odisha 30701 118564 13371 27917 13394 29803 26 Puducherry 977 4016 670 4075 872 3322 27 Punjab 27122 78084 37627 74144 20307 68709 28 Rajasthan 76287 103326 47754 117867 49890 169208 29 Sikkim 164 114 141 92 115 50 30 Tamil Nadu 167404 373314 106217 369536 29909 310685 31 Telengana 79806 93117 45114 43021 56241 54597 32 Tripura 2049 3200 2526 319 3112 242 33 Chandigarh 332 12227 326 11457 907 10281 34 Uttar Pradesh 660803 1194296 1656280 1068336 1498268 986137 35 Uttarakhand 3976 13014 7851 26636 9113 16945 36 West Bet!9_al 339595 89910 19250 43387 25891 36999 Grand Total 24,77,528 29,28,339 32,72,638 26,09,923 26,76,483 26,16,790

Pending Cases settled = Col (3) + Col (5)+ Col (7)= 81,55,052 7

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3947

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH, 2020

Holidays in Courts t3947. SHRI JYOTIRMAY SINGH MAHATO:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the number of holidays in the Judiciary is maximum in comparison to other Government offices and establishments in the country at present and if so, the details thereof; and (b) whether by reducing the number of holidays, filling all the vacant posts of judges and limiting the number of hearings is likely to help in speedy disposal of all the pending cases and if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) and (b): As Judiciary is an independent organ of the State under the Constitution of India, working days/hours and duration of vacations in the Supreme Court and in the High Courts are regulated by Rules framed by the respective Court. The working days as well as working hours of the District/Subordinate Courts are regulated by the respective High Court.

-2- 8

Disposal of cases pending in courts is within the domain of judiciary. The Government has adopted a co-ordinated approach to assist judiciary for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial systems, which, inter• alia, includes better infrastructure for courts including computerization, increase in strength of judicial officers/judges, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation and emphasis on human resource development. Central Government has no role in the appointment of Subordinate Judiciary as filling up of vacancies in the District and Subordinate Courts falls within the domain of the High Courts and the State Governments concerned.

-0- GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3971

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18th MARCH, 2020

Disposal of Criminal and Civil Cases

3971. SHRI SANJAY KAKA PATIL: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PINTU:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Government proposes to fix any time limit for disposal of criminal and civil cases in various courts in the country; (b) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor; (c) whether the Government proposes to set up any commission or committee for judicial reforms and speedy disposal of pending court cases; and (d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor?

ANSWER MINISTEROF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONSAND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a): No, Sir.

(b): As judiciary is an independent organ of the State under Constitution of India, such matters are regulated by the Judiciary and Government has no role to play. ID

(c) and (d): National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms was set up in August, 2011 with the twin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities. The Mission has been pursuing a co• ordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial administration, which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for courts including computerisation, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, re-engineering of court procedure for quick disposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development.

To advise on the goals, objectives and strategies of the National Mission and the Action Plan and its implementation, an Advisory Council has been set up under the Chairmanshipof Minister of Law and Justice with wide ranging membership. An action plan of the National Mission was formulated under 5 strategic initiatives which are reviewed by the Advisory Council of the National Mission from time to time. Eleven meetings of the Advisory Council have been held so far. Activities under the National Mission are of an on-going nature and regular reports are presented before the Advisory Council of the National Mission.

************ " GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ****** LOKSABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3977

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18th MARCH, 2020 Tele Law Scheme

3977. SHRI RITESH PANDEY:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) the details of initiatives taken under the project "Tele Law Scheme ,New Legal Aid and Empowerment Initiatives" in various States during each of the last three years and the current year, State-wise; (b) the action taken with regard to improving the institutional capacities of justice service providers, State-wise; and (c) the outcomes of the scheme, State-wise, including the State of Uttar Pradesh?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW & JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) Under Access to Justice scheme of Department of Justice, Tele-Law Programme has been functioning since 2017 in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and North-Eastern States that include Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland and Sikkim and the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, in co-operation with Common Service centers (CSCs). Initially free legal advice was given through 1800 CSCs for the persons entitled for free legal aid under section 12 of Legal Services Authorities, Act 1987, and others with Rs. 30/- per consultation as payment through panel lawyers via video conferencing and telephone facilities, available through CSCs at Panchayat Level. The programme has )2-

since been expanded to 115 Aspirational Districts in the country, thus covering total number of 29860 CSCs at present.

(b) to (c) To improve the institutional capacities of justice service providers, State-wise, Department of Justice with the help of CSC e- Governance Services India limited (CSC e-Gov) and National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is providing periodical trainings to Para Legal Volunteers (PLVs), Village Level Entrepreneurs (VLEs) and Panel Lawyers(PLs). Under the Tele-Law Scheme, 180482 cases have been registered and in 171348 \ cases, legal advice has been provided including beneficiaries from the

State of Uttar Pradesh as on 29th February, 2020.

******** I,

GOVERNMENTOF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3980

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18th MARCH, 2020

Recusal by Judges

3980. SHRI ASADUDDIN OWAISI:

SHRI SYED IMTIAZ JALEEL:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether cases of recusal by judges are on the rise year after year; (b) if so, the number of judges who recused them from hearing cases; (c)whether this practice is delaying the hearing of cases and is time consuming and if so, the details thereof; (d) whether judges do not give any reason for recusal from hearing cases; (e) if so, whether Government propose to make it mandatory for judges to

give reasons for recusal; and (f) if so, the details thereof and time by which a final decision is likely to be

taken thereon?

ANSWER MINISTEROF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONSAND ELECTRONICS& INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) to (f): Disposal of pending cases in courts and related case management procedure

including recusal by judges falls squarely within the domain of judiciary. Information on

cases of recusal by judges is not maintained by the Government. Reasons for recusal, if

any, are recorded in the court proceedings. '4

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3990

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH, 2020

Judicial Panels

3990. SHRI M. BADRUDDIN AJMAL:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) the details of judicial panels set up by the Government during the last five years and the current year along with issues on which the panels were constituted; (b) the number out of them who have submitted their reports to the Government; (c) the action taken by the Government thereon; and (d) the time by which the remaining panels are likely to submit their reports to the Government?

ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) to (d) The information is being collected and will be laid on the Table of the House.

-0- GOVERNMENTOF INDIA MINISTRYOF LAW & JUSTICE DEPARTMENTOF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA

UNSTARREDQUESTIONNO. 4017

TO BE ANSWEREDON WEDNESDAY,THE 18th MARCH,2020

Hardships faced by Advocates

4017. MS. S. JOTHIMANI:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether the Government is aware of the hardships faced by advocates and litigants due to sudden non-functioning of courts and discharge of benches; (b) if so, steps that are being taken to avoid or resolve such problems faced in the judicial system; (c) whether the Government will consider a suggestion to ensure an SMS/emaii communication facility to inform the parties and advocates about the adjournments of cases and discharge of benches and if so, the details thereof; (d) whether the Government will issue guidelines to courts and State judiciary including tribunals to ensure real-time updation of the websites with timely uploading of judgements (in PDF) and search options and if so, the details thereof; and (e) the measures that are being taken to make the judicial system more accessible to the public?

-----.~ --- - .------ANSWER MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) and (b): Functioning of courts and discharge of benches is within the domain of judiciary. Government has no role in this regard. (c): Push SMS and automatic email facility are available in District Court through Case Information System (CIS) in e-Courts portal. Litigants and Advocates can register their Mobile Numbers and Email 10 with CIS. The registered users get regular updates of their cases through SMS and emails. They can get soft copy of the orders and judgements of their cases through their emails.

(d): Uploading/updating of information on their websites is within the domain of judiciary. Government has no role in this regard.

(e): National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms was set up in August, 2011 .with the twin objectives of increasing access by reducing delays and arrears in the system and enhancing accountability through structural changes and by setting performance standards and capacities. The Mission has been pursuing a co-ordinated approach for phased liquidation of arrears and pendency in judicial administration, which, inter-alia, involves better infrastructure for courts including computerization, increase in strength of subordinate judiciary, policy and legislative measures in the areas prone to excessive litigation, re-engineering of court procedure for quick disposal of cases and emphasis on human resource development. The major steps taken during the last five years under various initiatives are as follows: (a) Improving infrastructure for Judicial Officers of District and Subordinate Courts: As on date, Rs. 7,453.10 crores have been released since the inception of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary in 1993-94. Out of this, Rs.4,008.80 crores (which is 53.79% of the total amount released till date) have been released to the States and UTs since April, 2014. The number of court halls '7 has increased from 15,818 as on 30.06.2014 to 19,694 as on 29.02.2020 and number of residential units has increased from 10,211 as on 30.06.2014 to 17,432 as on 29.02.2020 under this scheme. In addition, 2,814 court halls and 1,843 residential units are under construction.

• (b) Leveraging Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for improved justice deliverv: Government has been implementing the e-Courts Mission Mode Project throughout the country for Information and Communication Technology enablement of district and subordinate courts. Number of computerized District & Subordinate courts has increased from 13,672 to 16,845 registering an increase of 3,173 during 2014 till date. New and user• friendly version of Case Information Software has been developed and deployed at all the computerized District and Subordinate Courts. All stakeholders including Judicial Officers can access information relating to judicial proceedings/decisions of computerized District & Subordinate Courts and High Courts on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJOG). Currently, case status information in respect of over 13.13 crore pending and disposed cases and more than 11.46 crore orders / judgments pertaining to these computerized courts is available on NJDG. eCourts services such as details of case registration, cause list, case status, daily orders & final judgments are available to litigants and advocates through eCourts web portal, Judicial Service Centres (JSC) in all computerized courts, eCourts Mobile App, email service, SMS push & pull services. Video Conferencing facility has been enabled between 3240 court complexes and 1272 corresponding jails. (c) Filling up of vacant positions in Supreme Court, High Courts and District and Subordinate Courts: From 01.05.2014 to 29.02.2020, 35 Judges were appointed in Supreme Court. 522 new Judges were appointed and 443 Additional Judges were made permanent in the High Courts. Sanctioned strength of Judges of High Courts has been increased from 906 in May, 2014 to 1079 currently. Sanctioned and working strength of Judicial Officers in District and Subordinate Courts has increased as follows: As on Sanctioned Working Strength Strength 31.12.2013 19,518 15,115 29.02.2020 24,018 19,160

Filling up of vacancies in Subordinate judiciary falls within the domain of the State Governments and High Courts concerned. (d) Reduction in Pendency through I follow up by Arrears Committees: In pursuance of resolution passed in Chief Justices' Conference held in April, 2015, Arrears Committees have been set up in High Courts to clear cases pending for more than five years. Arrears Committees have been set up under District Judges too. Arrears Committee has been constituted in the Supreme Court to formulate steps to reduce pendency of cases in High Courts and District Courts. (e) Emphasis on Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR): Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (as amended on zo" August, 2018) stipulates mandatory pre• institution mediation and settlement of commercial disputes. Amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been made by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2015 for expediting the speedy resolution of disputes by prescribing timelines. (f) Initiatives to Fast Track Special Type of Cases: The Fourteenth Finance Commission endorsed the proposal of the Government to strengthen the judicial system in States which included, inter-alia, establishing Fast Track Courts for cases of heinous crimes; cases involving senior citizens, women, children etc., and urged the State Governments to use the additional fiscal space provided in the form of enhanced tax devolution form 32% to 42% to meet such requirements. As on 31.12.2019, 828 Fast Track Courts are functional for heinous crimes, crimes against women and children, family and matrimonial disputes, etc. To fast track criminal cases involving elected MPs I MLAs, ten (10) Special Courts are functional in nine (9) State slUTs (1 each in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and 2 in NCT of Delhi) and proportionate funds have been released to these States by the Government. Further, Government has approved a scheme for setting up 1023 Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) across the country for expeditious disposal of pending cases of Rape under IPC and crimes under POCSO • Act. As on date, 27 States/UTs have joined the scheme for setting up of 649 FTSCs including 363 exclusive POCSO courts. RS.99.43 crore (out of the total allocation of RS.100 crore) has already been released as the first instalment for FTSCs. (g) In order to reduce pendency and unclogging of the courts the Government has recently amended various laws like the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Commercial Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the Criminal Laws (Amendment) Act, 2018. *************

------· GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

LOKSABHA UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 4038

TO BE ANSWERED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 18.03.2020

Collegium on Appointment and Transfer of Judges

4038. PROF. SAUGATA RAY:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

(a) whether there is any standard criteria to implement the collegium recommendations on appointment and transfer of Judges in the country; (b) if so, the details thereof; (c) whether the Government has allegedly followed pick and choose policy in this regard; and (d) if so, the details thereof?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD)

(a) and (b): Judges of High Courts are appointed and transferred as per the procedure laid down in the Memorandum of Procedure prepared in 1998

pursuant to the Supreme Court Judgment of October, 6th, 1993 (Second Judges case) read with the advisory opinion of October, za", 1998 (Third Judges case). As per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), initiation of proposal for appointment of Judges of the High Courts vests with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court. Before forwarding the recommendation, the Chief Justice consults two of his senior-most colleagues regarding suitability of candidates. As per MoP, the various attributes such as integrity and character, competence, judicial. potential, antecedents, age, Annual Confidential Report (in respect of judicial Officers), Professional income and reported & unreported judgments (in respect of advocates), complaints/involvement in any criminal or civil litigation etc. are taken into consideration for appointment of Judges of High Courts. Regarding transfer of a High Court Judge from one High Court to another, MoP provides that the proposal is initiated by the Chief Justice of India in consultation with four senior-most puisne Judges of the Supreme Court. The MoP further provides that the Chief Justice of India is also expected to take into account the views of the Chief Justice of High Court from which the judge is to be transferred, as also the Chief Justice of the High Court to which the transfer is to be effected, besides taking into account the views of one or more Supreme Court judges who are in a position to offer views. All transfers are to be made in public interest i.e. for promoting better administration of justice throughout the country. (c): No Sir. (d): Does not arise.

***