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

Report No. 14

Table No. 1

Statement Showing The work Done in The High Court of Allahabad During The Year 1948-1956

Year

 

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

Remarks

No. of Judges

 

20

20

20

20

20

19

21

23

24

 

First Appeals

I

529

338

468

549

533

417

602

552

731

 
 

D

454

305

269

363

342

352

373

283

426

 
 

P

2407

2440

2639

2825

3016

3081

3310

3579

3384

 

Second Appeals

I

2673

2016

2773

2862

2793

2915

2682

2967

3010

I-Institution

 

D

1625

2502

3398

1788

2073

1670

1738

2570

2378

D-Disposal

 

P

7195

6709

6084

7158

7878

9123

10067

10464

11096

P-Pendency

Appeals

I

425

509

457

214

405

689

412

436

440

 
 

D

441

621

396

190

230

294

307

424

407

 
 

P

927

815

876

900

1075

1170

1284

1296

1329

 

Letters Patent Appeals

I

20

41

46

102

56

90

221

509

344

 
 

D

26

56

38

33

43

64

125

222

300

 
 

P

136

121

129

227

240

266

362

649

693

 

Civil Revisions

I

1189

1408

1700

1858

1701

1742

1663

1807

1899

 
 

D

26

56

38

33

43

64

125

222

300

 
 

P

136

121

129

227

240

266

362

649

693

 

Writ Petitions

I

..

..

384

8876

776

1175

1564

1461

5025

 
 

D

1259

1864

1129

848

4928

1072

1427

1681

1601

 
 

P

2042

1586

2187

3167

3940

4610

4854

4980

5278

 

Criminal Appeals

I

1062

1474

1486

1433

1889

2385

2438

2392

2453

 
 

D

1046

1294

1147

842

1131

1609

1724

2177

3127

 
 

P

828

1008

1347

1938

2696

3472

4186

4401

3727

 

Confirmation Cases

I

147

149

142

166

185

211

241

246

244

 
 

D

119

139

124

176

200

185

240

239

289

 
 

P

61

71

89

79

64

90

108

115

70

 

Criminal Revisions

I

1807

2278

2442

2918

2752

3093

2655

2878

2094

 
 

D

1743

2334

2055

2186

2234

2654

2771

3251

1931

 
 

P

731

675

1062

1794

2312

2756

2640

2267

2031

 

Inadequacy of judicial strength.- This statement shows the very heavy congestion of work in the High Court. There has actually been an enormous increase in the institutions during the past four decades. In 1930, the total number of proceedings instituted in the Allahabad High Court and Chief Court of Oudh was 7,449, in 1940 the number rose to 9591, in 1950 to 19,131 and in 1957 to 24,980. In every class of proceeding, whether it be First Appeals, or Second Appeals, Writ Petitions or Criminal Appeals, there has been a gradual but unmistakable rise in the quantum of work the institutions always exceeding the disposals.

But unfortunately, in spite of the rising institutions, there has been no correspondingly adequate increase in the strength of the High Court. Thus, while the institutions in 1950 were twice the volume in 1940, the strength of the High Court was raised only by 3 judges, from 17 in 1940 to 20 in 1950. It is obvious, therefore, that one major factor responsible for the alarming accumulation of arrears, carried over from year to year, during the past many years, is the continuous shortage of judges in the High Court.

It is quite apparent, that with the present strength of 25 judges, it will be impossible for the High Court to control its file. The magnitude of the problem of arrears can be best appreciated, by estimating the period of time which will be required to clear the existing accumulations.

Taking the disposal in the year 1956 as the basis, when with the maximum strength of judges available in the High Court the disposing capacity of the High Court was perhaps the greatest, it would roughly take the High Court more than 9 years to finish the regular First Appeals, 41/2 years for the regular Second Appeals, 3 years for appeals against orders and civil revisions, 2 years for Letters Patent Appeals and more than one year for criminal appeals and criminal revisions, on the hypothesis that all the judges are employed exclusively to the work of clearing the existing arrears. The gravity of the problem will be perceived from the statement (Table No. 2) which indicates the year in which the matters pending at the close of 1956 were instituted.

These colossal arrears did not show any sign of abatement even during the last year, that is, 1957; actually the number of pending matters further rose from 37,686 to 41,512. This picture of the Court's struggling year after year with swelling arrears is distressing. When we visited Allahabad in December 1956, we were informed that the First Appeals instituted in 1944-45 were still awaiting decision. An instance was also brought to our notice when a criminal revision was heard and the accused was acquitted after he had served out a sentence of 18 months imprisonment. It is difficult to describe the disposal of cases after such delays as the administration of justice.

Table No. 2

Nature of Proceeding

Year of Institutions

1944 and earlier

1945

1946

1947

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

Total

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1. Regular First Appeals

28

100

195

173

248

188

343

381

363

361

396

513

595

3884

2. Regular Second Appeals

..

2

1

10

26

92

843

1372

1527

1565

1536

1968

2154

1306

3. Appeal against Orders

6

..

4

2

5

17

24

34

152

167

257

313

346

1327

4. Letters Patent Appeals

1

..

1

2

..

5

11

50

42

62

70

71

44

359

5. Civil Revisions

1

1

5

4

11

21

118

703

715

778

786

913

1222

5278

6. Writ Petitions

..

....

..

..

..

..

..

1

..

1

28

143

3121

3294

7. Criminal Revisions

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

3

40

295

1408

1981

3727

8. Criminal Revisions

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

2

23

877

1129

2031



Reform of Judicial Administration Back




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