logo
PIL highlights shortage of judges in Delhi HC, urges filling vacancies

PIL highlights shortage of judges in Delhi HC, urges filling vacancies

A PIL has been filed in the Delhi High Court, highlighting a shortage of judges and urging for expeditiously filling up the vacancies by elevating eligible district judges and advocates from the bar.
The public interest litigation (PIL) matter is likely to come up for hearing next week before a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.
The Delhi High Court has a sanctioned strength of 60 judges but is working with 36 judges currently.
In his plea, petitioner and advocate Amit Sahni has sought an urgent judicial intervention regarding the "alarming and chronic shortage" of judges in the court, which has "adversely impacted the timely dispensation of justice and the functioning of the judiciary".
Sahni, a lawyer, has pointed out in his plea that according to the sanctioned strength, the court should have 60 judges -- 45 permanent and 15 additional.
"However, it is currently functioning with only 36 judges, reflecting a vacancy rate of 40 per cent. This serious shortfall has arisen due to retirements, recent inter-court transfers and inaction in appointing judges despite the constitutional mandate and existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) requiring appointments to be initiated well before vacancies arise," the plea says.
The petitioner has pointed out that several judges have retired recently, while three -- Justices Yashwant Varma, C D Singh and Dinesh Kumar Sharma -- have been transferred to other high courts.
Two more retirements are expected in the coming months, which will reduce the strength to 34 judges, further exacerbating pendency and judicial delays, the plea says.
The petitioner has urged the court to direct the authorities concerned for expeditious action in filling up the judicial vacancies by elevating eligible district judges and advocates from the bar, thereby ensuring the effective functioning of the high court.
"The continued shortage of judges has led to alarming pendency of cases, excessive workload on sitting judges, delays in disposal of critical matters, such as writs, bail applications, appeals and commercial disputes, thereby directly affecting citizens' rights and public trust in the judiciary," the plea says.
Judicial delays hurt the economically-weaker and marginalised sections the most, as they lack the resources to endure protracted legal battles or seek redressal elsewhere, the petition says.
It says judicial vacancies should not be viewed merely as an administrative concern, but as a serious issue of fundamental rights and institutional trust.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Court orders to fix CLAT PG 2025 answer key, release revised results
Court orders to fix CLAT PG 2025 answer key, release revised results

India Today

time9 hours ago

  • India Today

Court orders to fix CLAT PG 2025 answer key, release revised results

The Delhi High Court has asked the consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to revise the CLAT PG 2025 answer key and release the final results. This came after students filed petitions highlighting errors in the key and demanding fair PG 2025 was conducted on December 1, 2024, and multiple students across the country raised objections regarding the correctness of several answers. After all related pleas were transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court in February, the High Court has now issued its TO BE RE-EVALUATED FOR TWO QUESTIONSA bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed that marks be awarded as per the court's corrections for two questions. However, it rejected challenges to a third question, stating the answer was accurate. The court reviewed each objection in detail before deciding which needed correction. It then directed the consortium to update the answer key accordingly and release the revised results for CLAT PG QUESTIONS RS 1,000 OBJECTION FEEThe bench also flagged concerns about the Rs 1,000 fee charged per question for objections. While it acknowledged the consortium's concern about filtering frivolous claims, it called the fee 'excessive and disproportionate' compared to other court advised the consortium to review this issue with its advisory committee headed by Justice G Raghuram (retd) and take steps to avoid steep charges in future this decision, thousands of law aspirants can now expect their corrected results soon -- possibly giving some a fairer shot at admissions into top NLUs.(With PTI inputs)

Award marks on two disputed PG admission question, Delhi HC directs CLAT consortium
Award marks on two disputed PG admission question, Delhi HC directs CLAT consortium

New Indian Express

time12 hours ago

  • New Indian Express

Award marks on two disputed PG admission question, Delhi HC directs CLAT consortium

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Friday directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to award marks to candidates for two disputed questions in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 for postgraduate (PG) students. A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ruled in favour of the candidates on two out of the three questions that had been challenged before the court. One of the questions under dispute concerned a supposed extract from the Supreme Court's judgment in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v A Rajappa and Ors. The court noted that this was not an actual extract from the judgment, but rather material taken from a commentary. 'It is not disputed that the candidates who had appeared in the examination were not previously provided with any list of judgments that they were to be ready with. That apart, it is not disputed that the passage (V) is not an extract from the judgment... it would be unreasonable to expect candidates to look for any answer beyond what is provided in the passage itself. Thus, the answer in option 'B' is incorrect and option 'C' is the correct answer. Resultantly, the Consortium shall accord marks to the candidates accordingly,' the court held. The bench also rejected the Consortium's position on a jurisprudence question regarding the source of the statement: 'Right is an interest which is to be recognised, protected and enforced by law.' The petitioners had also urged the Court to examine the Rs 1,000 fee imposed per objection to the CLAT PG provisional answer key, arguing it was excessive. While acknowledging that the fee appeared high compared to similar national-level exams, the court recognised the Consortium's argument that the charge was intended to deter frivolous objections. 'There has to be a fine balance which needs to be resolved between two sets of genuine grievances,' the court observed.

HC grants relief to candidates
HC grants relief to candidates

Hans India

time16 hours ago

  • Hans India

HC grants relief to candidates

New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store