23/07/2020 - Indian Polity

KEY POINTS

·         The Puducherry government spends exorbitant sums of money towards expenses of the large High Court. With not much of a population, this amount can be reduced to less than a quarter of the amount spent with a much smaller High Court for Puducherry.

·         In fact, according to the Constitution, when a common High Court is established for more than one State, administrative expenses have to be paid only from the consolidated fund of the ‘State’ in which the principal seat of the High Court is situated.

·         However, this provision is breached with respect to Puducherry which shares the disproportionately exorbitant expenses with Tamil Nadu. On the other hand, administrative expenses of a High Court at the Union Territory shall be drawn from the ‘Consolidated fund of India’ under the Constitution.

·         A Puducherry High Court, with four to five judges, can ensure quick action on pendency of matters of the High Court matters, at least at Puducherry.

·         However as of 2016, the ratio is only 12 judges for one million population. This ratio at Puducherry can be increased if a separate High Court with four to five judges is established.

A data comparison

·         The number of cases filed and disposed of at Puducherry in 2010 is four times higher than the numbers at Sikkim, Manipur and Goa (with High Courts) put together. Therefore, the size of population and territory is irrelevant. Bigger States have more judges and staff, smaller States have lesser numbers of these.

·         Similarly, the memorandum provided by the All India Bar Association to the Chief Minister in 2017 shows that the number of cases disposed from Puducherry (28,631 cases) is three times more than the number of cases (9,031 cases) disposed by four High Courts (Tripura, Manipur, Meghalaya and Sikkim) put together in 2016.

·         The presence of the Constitutional Court in the capital city acts as a check on the executive and legislature. Even the exercise of safeguarding fundamental rights involves travel, time and expenses.

·         Several people often cite that litigants from western districts travel the long distance to Chennai. It defies logic why litigants from Puducherry need not be benefitted merely because other litigants are not benefitted, especially when the Constitution permits Puducherry to have its own High Court under Article 241.

Aiding Statehood demand

·         A High Court for Puducherry will also strengthen voices seeking Statehood. The Constitution enabled establishment of a legislature and Council of Ministers for certain Union Territories with the intent of providing them Statehood gradually.

·         The Puducherry government should now form a committee to prepare a comprehensive report and a draft Bill backing its proposal and forward it to the Central government. In this the nominated Lieutenant Governor and the elected Chief Minister must work in tandem.

Article 241 talks about "High Courts for Union territories". It says-

              "Parliament may by law constitute a High Court for a Union territory or declare any court in any such territory to be a High Court for all or any of the purposes of this Constitution".

In 1962, when Puducherry was merged with India, the jurisdiction of the Madras High Court was extended to it.  After following the status quo for these many years, now, the Union Territory of Puducherry aspires to have a separate high court for itself. 

>>> Need to set up high court in the union territory of Puducherry :

- As per the const. of India, "When a common High Court is established for more than one State, administrative expenses have to be paid only from the consolidated fund of the ‘State’ in which the principal seat of the High Court is situated". 

- However, this provision is not followed with respect to Puducherry which shares the disproportionately exorbitant expenses with Tamil Nadu based Madras High Court.

- With not much of a population in Puducherry, this exorbitant sums of money paid for the expenses of the larger court can be reduced to less than a quarter of the amount spent with a much smaller High Court for Puducherry.

- Ensuring quick action on pendency of cases : A Puducherry High Court, with four to five judges, can ensure quick action on pendency of matters.

- Data comparison with other high courts :

The size of the population and territory is irrelevant for Puducherry because

the number of cases filed and disposed of at Puducherry in 2010 is four times higher than the numbers at Sikkim, Manipur and Goa (with High Courts) put together.

- Hardships of travel : The exercise of safeguarding fundamental rights involves "travel, time and expenses". Several people often cite that litigants from Puducherry travel the long distance to Chennai.

>>> Way ahead :

- In March 2016, the central govt had suggested that the establishment of a High Court will be taken up if the Puducherry govt proposes the idea. 

- Thus, the Puducherry govt needs to form a committee to prepare a comprehensive report and a draft Bill backing its proposal and forward it to the Central govt.

>>> Conclusion : 

To have a seperate High court for itself is not only the demand but is a need for union territory of Puducherry because a constitutional court  will act as a check on the executive and legislature, which a regional  bench cannot.

please review sir, Thank you.

Kindly Review Sir/Ma’am, Thank you.

Pls Review Sir