Bombay High Court CJ Dipankar Datta Recuses From Hearing PIL Seeking To Expedite Process For Appointment Of Judges
Chief Justice Dipankar Datta of Bombay High Court recused from hearing a Public Interest Litigation praying for the process of appointment of judges at the high court to be expedited. The PIL, filed by Dr. Sharmila Ghuge, professor of law at Mumbai University also prays that retired high court judges be appointed as ad-hoc judges till the process of fulfilling the sanctioned strength...
Chief Justice Dipankar Datta of Bombay High Court recused from hearing a Public Interest Litigation praying for the process of appointment of judges at the high court to be expedited.
The PIL, filed by Dr. Sharmila Ghuge, professor of law at Mumbai University also prays that retired high court judges be appointed as ad-hoc judges till the process of fulfilling the sanctioned strength of 94 regular judges is completed.
"In the present PIL the Petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court to expedite the appointment process under Articles 217(1), 224(1) and (2) or in the alternative or in addition to the same, as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit, initiate/recommend appointments of retired Judges for sitting in the High Court under Article 224-A", the petition states.
Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar directed that the petition be placed before a bench of which Chief Justice Datta is not a member.
The petition stated that while the Central Government is increasing the sanctioned strength of judges in the Bombay High Court, adequate number of judges aren't being appointed to fulfil the sanctioned strength.
Against a sanctioned strength of 94 judges, Bombay High Court has 44 permanent and 18 additional Judges, some of whom will retire soon.
The process of appointing regular judges may time, meanwhile the court can exercise its powers Article 224-A of the Constitution to appoint retired judges, the petition states.
The petition seeks that the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Lok Prahari v. Union of India be implemented by the Bombay High Court. The guidelines need to be followed if there are more than 20% vacancies in a court. Bombay High Court has a 34% vacancy.
The petition submits that 5,92,648 cases are pending before the court. Out of these, 2,31,401 civil cases and 33,353 criminal cases are pending for more than 5 years.
The petition also refers to the 124th Report of Law Commission of India which recommended that retired judges having decades of adjudicatory experience could be appointed to dispose of mounting arrears.
The petition prays that the process of appointment of regular judges be expedited. Further, process of the appointing retired judges as ad-hoc judges pending filling of the complete sanctioned strength in the Court be expedited as well.
Case title – Dr. Sharmila Ghuge v. Union of India and Ors.