AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 80

Question No. 12

(a) Three High Courts agree with the suggestion, but out of them-

(i) one has expressed agreement only in principle, stating that practical difficulties (for example, the proceedings being in regional language) may come in; and

(ii) another has qualified its agreement with the, suggestion by stating that one-third Judges of each High Court should be "initially" appointed in another State on a reciprocal basis.

Three High Courts are opposed to the suggestion. In their view, it is impracticable. In one High Court, the Chief Justice agrees with the suggestion, but not the other Judges.

(b) In regard to individual Judges the opinion in one High Court was equally divided: the Chief Justice was of the view that the suggestion will not bring forth the result envisaged. In another High Court, one Judge agrees with the suggestion, while one Judge is opposed and four Judges state that only willing Judges should be transferred, but that there should be no convention.

(c) A very eminent jurist has expressed himself as wholly in favour of the suggestion.

(d) Two State Governments and one Law Secretary are in agreement with the suggestion. Besides this, one more State Government is of the view that one-fifth of the Judges may be from outside the State that State Government has also expressed the view that one-fifth of the Judges appointed from the Bar should be from among Advocates practising in Mofussil District Courts. Finally, one State Government, though not in favour of the suggestion for appointment of Judges from outside the State in ar y fixed ratio, favours measures calculated to induct Judges from outside the State.



Method of appointments of Judges Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys