The President addressed the Parliament after the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections on 4th June 2009. She also addressed Parliament on 22nd February 2010, as well as on 21st February 2011. The tables below highlight some items from the agenda of the central government as outlined in these speeches, as well as the initiatives undertaken with respect to these agenda items. Table 1: Some Items from the President’s Address to Parliament on 4th June 2009
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Establishment of National Counter-Terrorism Centre | Proposed launch of NCTC in March 2011 on hold |
Enactment of legislation for prevention of communal violence | Communal Violence Bill 2005 pending in Parliament. New bill drafted by NAC but not introduced in Parliament |
Unique Identity Card scheme to be implemented in three years | Unique Identification Authority of India created under Planning Commission on 28 January 2009. Bill to give statutory status pending in Parliament |
Establishment of a regulator for the pension sector | Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 24 March 2011 |
Convergence of NREGA with other programs; expansion of works permitted; independent monitoring and grievance redressal | |
Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana to cover all families below the poverty line in five years | |
Enactment of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Bill | Bill passed in 2009 and brought into force on 1 April 2009 |
Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan to universalize access to secondary education | Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan launched in March 2009 |
National Mission for Female Literacy to make every woman literate in five years | National Literacy Mission recast in 2009 to focus on female literacy |
Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses under Indira Awas Yojana in five years | |
Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for slum dwellers and urban poor | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
Enactment of National Food Security Act | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Enactment of Amendment Bill to Land Acquisition Act and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill | Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 7 September 2011 |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha, pending in Lok Sabha |
Constitutional Amendment for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
Amendment of RTI to provide for disclosure by government in all non-strategic areas | |
Model Public Services Law to be drawn up in consultation with states | Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievance Bill, 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 20 December 2011 |
Introduction of Goods and Services Tax | Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 March 2011 |
National Council for Human Resources in Health | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
National Council for Higher Education | Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
*Note: Blank cells indicate that PRS has not been able to find official information in the public domain. Table 2: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 22nd February 2010
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Introduction of legislation to ensure food security | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for urban poor and slum dwellers | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
Disposal of remaining claims under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act | |
Introduction of amendment to the Wakf Act | Passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
Enactment of Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 | Pending in Rajya Sabha since 2005 |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
Constitutional amendments for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
Establishment of National Council for Higher Education and Research | Higher Education and Research Bill, 2011 introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
Legislation for facilitating participation of foreign academic institutions in the education sector | Foreign Educational Institutions Bill, 2010 introduced in Lok Sabha on 3 May 2010 |
Voting rights for Indian citizens living abroad | Bill passed. NRIs can vote at the place of residence that is mentioned in their passport |
Table 3: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 21st February 2011
Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
Enactment of Food Security Law | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
Whistleblower Bill | Bill passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
Enactment of Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 1 December 2010 |
Enactment of new Mines and Minerals Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 12 December 2011 |
Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses during 2009-14 | |
Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
Introduction of Bill regarding protection of children from sexual offences | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 23 March 2011 |
Introduction of Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill | Not introduced till date |
Recently, the Supreme Court collegium reiterated its recommendations for the appointment of 11 judges to certain High Courts. It had first recommended these names earlier this year and in August last year, but these appointments were not made. The Indian judiciary faces high vacancies across all levels (the Supreme Court, High Courts, and subordinate courts). Vacancy of judges in courts is one of the reasons for delays and a rising number of pending cases, as there are not enough judges to hear and decide cases. As of today, more than four crore cases are pending across all courts in India. In this blog post, we discuss vacancies across courts over the years, delays in appointment of judges, and methods to determine the adequate judge strength required to handle the caseload courts face.
High vacancy of judges across courts
Vacancies in courts keep on arising periodically due to retirement, resignation, demise, or elevation of judges. Over the years, the sanctioned strength of judges in both High Courts and subordinate courts has been increased gradually. However, vacancies persist due to insufficient appointments (see Figures 1 and 2). Between 2010 and 2020, vacancies increased from 18% to 21% across all levels of courts (from 6% to 12% in the Supreme Court, from 33% to 38% in High Courts, and from 18% to 20% in subordinate courts).
Figure 1: Vacancy of judges in High Courts |
Figure 2: Vacancy of judges in subordinate courts |
|
|
Sources: Court News 2010-2018; Vacancy Statement, and Rajya Sabha replies, Part I, Budget Session (2021), Department of Justice; PRS. |
As on November 1, 2021, the Supreme Court had a vacancy of one judge (out of a sanctioned strength of 34). Vacancy in High Courts stood at 37% (406 posts vacant out of a sanctioned strength of 1,098). Since May, 2021, the Supreme Court collegium has recommended more than 130 names for appointment as High Court judges. In three High Courts (Telangana, Patna, and Calcutta), at least half of the posts are vacant (see Figure 3). The Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice (2020) noted that every year, 35-40% of posts of High Court judges remain unfilled.
Figure 3: Vacancy of judges across High Courts (in %) (as on November 1, 2021)
|
Source: Vacancy Statement, Department of Justice; PRS. |
Appointments of High Court judges are guided by a memorandum of procedure. As per this memorandum, the appointment process is to be initiated by the concerned High Court at least six months before a vacancy occurs. However, the Standing Committee (2021) noted that this timeline is rarely adhered to by High Courts. Further, in the final stage of the process, after receiving recommendations from the Supreme Court collegium, the executive appoints judges to the High Court. No timeline is prescribed for this stage of the appointment process. In 2018 and 2019, the average time taken to appoint High Court judges after receiving the collegium’s recommendations was five to seven months.
As of today, over 3.6 crore cases are pending before subordinate courts in India. As on February 20, 2020, 21% posts for judges were vacant (5,146 posts out of the sanctioned strength of 24,018) in subordinate courts. Subordinate courts in Bihar, Haryana, and Jharkhand (among the states with high population) had a high proportion of vacancies of judges (see Figure 4). Note that the Supreme Court is monitoring the procedure for appointment of judges to subordinate courts.
For an analysis of the data on pendency and vacancies in the Indian judiciary, see here.
Figure 4: Vacancy of judges across subordinate courts (in %) (as on February 20, 2020)
|
Source: Report No. 101, Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice (2020); PRS. |
How many judges do we need?
The Law Commission of India (1987) had noted the importance of manpower planning for the judiciary. Lack of adequate number of judges means a greater workload per judge. Thus, it becomes essential to arrive at an optimal judge strength to deal with pending and new cases in courts. Over the years, different methods of calculating the required judge strength for subordinate courts (where the backlog of cases in the Indian judiciary is concentrated) have been recommended (see Table 1).
Table 1: Methods recommended for calculating the required number of judges for subordinate courts
Method of calculation |
Recommendation and its status |
Judge-to-population ratio: optimum number of judges per million population |
The Law Commission of India (1987) had recommended increasing this ratio to 50 judges per million people. This was reiterated by the Supreme Court (2001) and the Standing Committee on Home Affairs (2002). For 2020, the judge-to-population ratio was 21 judges per million population. Note that this figure is calculated based on the sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court, High Courts and subordinate courts. |
Rate of disposal: number of additional judges required (to clear the existing backlog of cases and ensure that new backlog is not created) based on the average number of cases disposed per judge |
The Law Commission of India (2014) proposed this method. It rejected the judge-to-population ratio method, observing that filing of cases per capita varies substantially across geographic units depending on socio-economic conditions. |
Weighted case load method: calculating judge strength based on the disposal by judges, taking into account the nature and complexity of cases in local conditions |
The National Court Management Systems Committee (NCMS) (2016) critiqued the rate of disposal method. It proposed, as an interim measure, the weighted case load method, which addresses the existing backlog of cases as well as the new flow of cases every year in subordinate courts. In 2017, the Supreme Court accepted this model. |
Time-based weighted case load method: calculating the required judge strength taking into account the actual time spent by judges in different types of cases at varying stages based on an empirical study |
Used widely in the United States, this was the long-term method recommended by the NCMS (2016) to assess the required judge strength for subordinate courts. It involves determining the total number of ‘judicial hours’ required for disposing of the case load of each court. The Delhi High Court used this approach in a pilot project (January 2017- December 2018) to calculate the ideal judge strength for disposing of pending cases in certain courts in Delhi. |
Sources: Reports No. 120 (1987) and 245 (2014), Law Commission of India; Report No. 85, Standing Committee on Home Affairs (2002); Note for Calculating Required Judge Strength for Subordinate Courts, National Court Management Systems Committee (NCMS) (2016); Imtiyaz Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, Supreme Court (2017); PRS.