SC reserves order on plea for National Court of Appeals

The Supreme Court today reserved its order on a plea seeking setting up of National Court of Appeal with regional benches in major cities for deciding cases arising from high courts with the Centre opposing it on the grounds including the litigants cannot be deprived of the right to approach the apex court.
"The Supreme Court should take some self-correcting measures and use innovative technology and impose heavy costs on frivolous petitions to reduce pendency," Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said to the three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur.
He said that initially, there were eight judges in the apex court and out of them six used to hear matters of constitutional importance and two other judges used to hear regular kind of appeals.

"Now, the Supreme Court has become a regular court of appeals for 80 per cent of cases," he said that led the bench to ask him as to who has contributed more in it.
"Who else has converted the Supreme Court into the regular court of appeal? What about the state. You (Centre) yourself have made it," the bench said.
Referring to relevant constitutional schemes, Rohatgi said that the citizens have "inalienable" fundamental right to move the Supreme Court and this is part of the "basic structure" which cannot be taken away.

The bench, also comprising Justices R Banumathi and U U Lalit, indicated that it may refer the matter to larger constitutional bench for deliberations.

Rohatgi opposed the proposal of setting up of the National Court of Appeal saying that it is neither "feasible nor desirable" and if it is set up, it will be a "self-defeating exercise as after 10 years more number of cases will clog the system and the dockets will again get full".
Earlier, the Centre had termed the plea as a "fruitless
endeavour" which will not lessen the burden of two crore cases pending in trial courts.
The apex court was hearing a PIL by Puducherry-based V Vasanthakumar pressing for setting up of a National Court of appeal at Chennai, Mumbai and Kolkata and quashing of the government order rejecting his proposal on the issue.

In February 2014, Kumar had moved the apex court with the same prayer when it had disposed of the matter directing the Centre to respond to his suggestion within six months.
Later, the Centre rejected his suggestion on the ground that it would require an amendment in Article 130 of the Constitution which "is impermissible as this would change the constitution of the Supreme Court completely."
Vasanthakumar has now approached the apex court again seeking quashing of this decision of the central government.