As of April 26, Rajasthan has 2,083 confirmed cases of COVID-19 (fifth highest in the country), of which 493 have recovered and 33 have died.  On March 18, the Rajasthan government had declared a state-wide curfew till March 31, to check the spread of the disease.  A nation-wide lockdown has also been in place since March 25 and is currently, extended up to May 3.  The state has announced several policy decisions to prevent the spread of the virus and provide relief for those affected by it.  This blog summarises the key policy measures taken by the Government of Rajasthan in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Early measures for containment

Between late January and early February, Rajasthan Government’s measures were aimed towards identification, screening and testing, and constant monitoring of passenger arrivals from China.  Instructions were also issued to district health officials for various prevention, treatment, & control related activities, such as (i) mandatory 28-day home isolation for all travellers from China, (ii) running awareness campaigns, and (iii) ensuring adequate supplies of Personal Protection Equipments (PPEs).  Some of the other measures, taken prior to the state-wide lockdown, are summarised below:

Administrative measures

  • The government announced the formation of Rapid Response Teams (RRTs), at the medical college-level and at district-level on March 3 and 5, respectively.

  • The District Collector was appointed as the Nodal Officer for all COVID-19 containment activities.  Control Rooms were to be opened at all Sub-divisional offices.  The concerned officers were also directed to strengthen information dissemination mechanisms and tackle the menace of fake news.

  • Directives were issued on March 11 to rural health workers/officials to report for duty on Gazetted holidays.  Further, government departments were shut down between March 22 and March 31.  Only essential departments such as Health Services were allowed to function on a rotation basis at 50% capacity and special / emergency leaves were permitted. 

Travel and Movement

Health Measures

  • Advisories regarding prevention and control measures were issued to: (i) District Collectors, regarding sample collection and transportation, hotels, and preparedness of hospitals, (ii) Police department, to stop using breath analysers, (iii) Private hospitals, regarding preparedness and monitoring activities, and (iv) Temple trusts, to disinfect their premises with chemicals. 

  • The government issued Standard Operating Procedures for conducting mock drills in emergency response handling of COVID-19 cases.  Training and capacity building measures were also initiated for (i) Railways, Army personnel etc and (ii) ASHA workers, through video conferencing. 

  • A model micro-plan for containing local transmission of COVID was released.  Key features of the plan include: (i) identification and mapping of affected areas, (ii) activities for prevention control, surveillance, and contact tracing, (iii) human resource management, including roles and responsibilities, (iv) various infrastructural and logistical support, such as hospitals, labs etc, and (v) communication and data management.

  • Resource Management: Private hospitals and medical colleges were instructed to reserve 25 % of beds for COVID-19 patients.  They were also instructed to utilise faculty from the departments of Preventive and Social Medicine to conduct health education and awareness activities. 

  • Over 6000 Students of nursing schools were employed in assisting the health department to conduct screening activities being conducted at public places, railways stations, bus stands etc.

  • Further, the government issued guidelines to ensure the rational use of PPEs.

Welfare Measures

During the lockdown

State-wide curfew announced on March 18 has been followed by a nation-wide lockdown between March 25 and May 3. However, certain relaxations have been recommended by the state government from April 21 onwards.  Some of the key measures undertaken during the lockdown period are: 

Administrative Measures

  • Advisory groups and task forces were set up on – (i) COVID-19 prevention, (ii) Health and Economy, and (iii) Higher education.  These groups will provide advice on the way forward for (i) prevention and containment activities, (ii) post-lockdown strategies and strategies to revive the economy, and (iii) to address the challenges facing the higher education sector respectively. 

  • Services of retiring medical and paramedical professionals retiring between March and August have been extended till September 2020. 

Essential Goods and Services

  • A Drug Supply Control Room was set up at the Rajasthan Pharmacy Council.  This is to ensure uninterrupted supply of medicines during the lockdown and will also assist in facilitating home delivery of medicines.

  • The government permitted Fair Price Shops to sell products such as masalas, sanitisers, and hygiene products, in addition to food grains.

  • Village service cooperatives were declared as secondary markets to facilitate farmers to sell their produce near their own fields/villages during the lockdown. 

  • A Whatsapp helpline was also set up for complaints regarding hoarding, black marketing, and overpricing.

Travel and Movement

  • Once lockdown was in place, the government issued instructions to identify, screen, and categorise people from other states who have travelled to Rajasthan.  They were to be categorised into: (i) people displaying symptoms to be put in isolation wards, (ii) people over 60 years of age with symptoms and co-morbidities to be put in quarantine centres, and (iii) asymptomatic people to be home quarantined.

  • On March 28, the government announced the availability of buses to transport people during the lockdown.  Further, stranded students in Kota were allowed to return to their respective states. 

  • On April 2, a portal and a helpline were launched to help stranded foreign tourists and NRIs.

  • On April 11, an e-pass facility was launched for movement of people and vehicles. 

Health Measures

  • To identify COVID-19 patients, district officials were instructed to monitor people with ARI/URI/Pneumonia or other breathing difficulties coming into hospital OPDs.  Pharmacists were also instructed to not issue medicines for cold/cough without prescriptions. 

  • A mobile app – Raj COVID Info – was developed by the government for tracking of quarantined people.  Quarantined persons are required to send their selfie clicks at regular intervals, failing which a notification would be sent by the app.  The app also provides a lot of information on COVID-19, such as the number of cases, and press releases by the government.

  • Due to the lockdown, people had restricted access to hospitals and treatment.  Thus, instructions were issued to utilise Mobile Medical Vans for treatment/screening and also as mobile OPDs

  • On April 20, a detailed action plan for prevention and control of COVID-19 was released.  The report recommended: (i) preparation of a containment plan, (ii) formation of RRTs, (iii) testing protocols, (iv) setting up of control room and helpline, (v) designated quarantine centres and COVID-19 hospitals, (vi) roles and responsibilities, and (vii) other logistics. 

Welfare Measures

  • The government issued instructions to make medicines available free of cost to senior citizens and other patients with chronic illnesses through the Chief Minister’s Free Medicine Scheme.  

  • Rs 60 crore was allotted to Panchayati Raj Institutions to purchase PPEs and for other prevention activities. 

  • A one-time cash transfer of Rs 1000 to over 15 lakh construction workers was announced.  Similar cash transfer of Rs 1000 was announced for poor people who were deprived of livelihood during the lockdown, particularly those people with no social security benefits.  Eligible families would be selected through the Aadhaar database.  Further, an additional cash transfer of Rs 1500 to needy eligible families from different categories was announced.

  • The state also announced an aid of Rs 50 lakh to the families of frontline workers who lose their lives due to COVID-19.

  • To maintain social distancing, the government will conduct a door-to-door distribution of ration to select beneficiaries in rural areas of the state.  The government also announced the distribution of free wheat for April, May, and June, under the National Food Security Act, 2013.  Ration will also be distributed to stranded migrant families from Pakistan, living in the state.

  • The government announced free tractor & farming equipment on rent in tie-up with farming equipment manufacturers to assist economically weak small & marginal farmers.

Other Measures

  • Education: Project SMILE was launched to connect students and teachers online during the lockdown.  Study material would be sent through specially formed Whatsapp groups.  For each subject, 30-40 minute content videos have been prepared by the Education Department.

  • Industry:  On April 18, new guidelines were issued for industries and enterprises to resume operations from April 20 onwards.  Industries located in rural areas or export units / SEZs in municipal areas where accommodation facilities for workers are present, are allowed to function.  Factories have been permitted to increase the working hours from 8 hours to 12 hours per day, to reduce the requirement of workers in factories.  This exemption has been allowed for the next three months for factories operating at 60% to 65% of manpower capacity.

For more information on the spread of COVID-19 and the central and state government response to the pandemic, please see here.

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

image

image

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)

image

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)

image

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.