SC disposes of plea seeking reduction of pendency of cases

The Supreme Court today disposed of a plea seeking various reliefs including measures to reduce pendency of cases, saying it has taken some steps in this regard.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud disposed of the PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking to take appropriate steps to reduce the pendency of cases from 15 to 3 years.

"We appreciate the concern. Steps have been taken to do the needful. This writ petition is disposed of," the bench said.

In his plea, Upadhayay had sought a direction to the Ministry of Finance to allocate sufficient funds from national resources or the Consolidated Fund of India to meet the demands of state judiciary in line with the recommendations of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution.

He had also sought to set up division benches at district levels to reduce the pendency of cases.

During the hearing, senior lawyer Vikas Singh, appearing for Upadhyay, said he was withdrawing one of the prayers seeking to plan the annual court calendar in a such a way so that courts function at least 225 days a year and 6 hours per day as suggested by the Law Commission.

"The apex court can deal with it on the administrative side," Singh said.

Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had last month asked the high courts across the country to suggest measures for speedy disposal of cases to curb pendency and filling up of vacancies in the subordinate judiciary.

In a communication to the chief justices of the high courts, the CJI has suggested that a disposal review mechanism should be put in place keeping in view the pendency of large number of cases in the courts.

In a separate communication to the high courts recently, the CJI had highlighted the issue of number of vacancies in the subordinate judiciary and asked them to fill up the vacancies where it was 15 per cent or more.

Recently, while speaking at a function held at the Orissa High Court, Justice Misra had reportedly highlighted the issue of lack of proper infrastructure in the courts and said that the state's failure to provide basic facilities would be a violation of the litigants' right to life, including right to speedy trial.