Appointment of High Court Judges

,
Appointment of High Court Judges.

Now the Law Minister wants to appoint about 700 High Court Judges on ad hoc basis .Yes it should have been done in the regime of the then Law Minister Hansraj Bharatdwaj. The action of appointment should be done in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and not in arbitrary way. Only retired judges of the High Courts should be appointed again. Secondly the vacancies should be filled up as early as possible from the competent advocates and judicial officers in the ratio of 50:50.These all posting should be done outside their states so that they may get environment to work if they so chose! The ad hoc judges should be given only Civil First and second appeals which the advocate judges do not do and to say most of them are not able to do so. It is most necessary that they should not be given writ work otherwise they will also avoid Civil Work.
It is further to be seen that the government do not pack the judiciary by appointing ‘its’ men as these posts are Constitutional posts. It is also required that the present age of superannuation should be raised to 65 years of High Court Judges and 67 of Supreme Court Judges.

Fight with Judiciary

The Union Law Minister appears to be in fighting mood with judiciary. It appears that the judiciary is for no reason on defensive side therefore he is showing aggressive mood by blaming judiciary that people have lost faith in judiciary and that is why naxalist activities are growing fast. What a jock of the year sir dear Law Minister! Perhaps according to him it is the job of the judiciary to control naxalism .According to him about 3 crorers of cases is pending in the courts. Yes it may be true but this does not mean that due to this naxalist actives have gone up. What about terrorism Maoist activities. What about the governance of Indian government and state governments? Does this mean that these problems may be due to loss of faith of people in judiciary!! Remember that every government is the big litigant in the courts and in most cases advocates for governments are appointed on political basis and out of them most are below average. The government departments always show indecisiveness and avoid reaching any final decision and people have to approach courts under constraint.
Remember that only 2/3 that 67 percent judges are posted against the full straight and there is no reason why the vacancies are not filled up in reasonable time. It clearly goes to show that the judiciary and governments want to paste their men in judiciary! It may not be taken in light mood.
It may be that in higher judiciary problem of corruption and in competency in efficiency may be more but in District Judiciary the main problem is of incompetence of judges to know procedural law and to some extent substantive law. The way in which recruitments are made is very strange and poor. No substantive changes are effected till now. Since 2004 I am trying hard to suggest a scheme to change courses and mode of recruitment and training but to no avail. No one gives head to it.
Poor legal education has never been viewed by the advocates, Universities and Bar Council of India and state units. Copying in law colleges has become very common and there is no one to rein on such activities. An advocate who has just registered as advocate should not be allowed to practice in High Court for at least 5 years. All concerned should look the matter in right perspective. The judges from advocates’ quota are being elevated having no better knowledge in different fields of law. I am saying with full confidence as I have seen such affairs from very near.
It will better for the Law Minister to be sober and have dialogues with the judiciary and avoid so called [cheap] popularity by approaching media and public platforms. Hundreds have come and hundreds will go but nothing substantial would be changed as no one has will power to do better. Every one consumes time and then seats at home comfortably.