A Fundamental research on the Supreme court of India on the aspects of the
social science point of view to justify the need for an additional bench with
respect to the increasing population by itís political, geographical constrains
of the common men on the economical aspects. In order to reduce the burden of
courts, Government of India The established the Tribunals by several acts, where
the administrative tribunals not binding to the Code of Civil procedures put a
test on the common man by process of law.
The High Court has given thousands and
thousands of judgments, quashed, set aside the order of these Tribunals and
secured the common men from the abuse the process of law. The right of common
men to file writs before the Supreme Court under article 32, where these matters
can be addressed to Supreme Court of India. However, it is not feasible to file
a petition by any common men, and those touched with socio economic point to
express the need of additional bench in the Indian Continent, less bias
statement but to catch hold the people point, to addresses who can sort this
matter, when this research succeeded for thesis for Ph.D, studies.
Observing the Issues:
1.38 billion Population to Appeal 1 Supreme Court.
High Population in Cities, States and /or Countries are one of the major social
issue where the disputes arises between the people are high, common and
unavoidable. The pending cases in India, keeping increasing day by day and all
the courts are over loaded and occupied, for over 2 decades.
In order to reduce the burden of High Courts in different states, Government of
India has introduced established Tribunal systems through several acts and has
established DRT/DRAT, NCLT, NCLAT, National Green Tribunals to extend the reach
Issue Identified in Tribunals:
In order to reduce the burden on the courts, the quasi judicial organizations
such as Tribunals were established by the Government of India, but
establishments has not bound to follow the code of procedures such as CPC and
Cr.PC; whereas these Tribunals acts without any supervision in their specified
law; resulted non interference by High Courts and became autonomous and threat
to Common public.
DRT / DRAT, NCLT, NCLAT has not following the code of procedures and there were
hundreds of judgments released by High Courts that these Tribunals acted against
the principle of Natural Justice but these tribunals has continuously evading
the clutches of superior court and being profit making center for Banks, Public
sector companies, whereas these proceeding officers deciding the cases, none of
them has not been appointed by the Apex Courts. It is such painful that some of
proceeding officers being appointed by Government of India without any Law
background, to head judicial function and decide the case.
Referring to the aforesaid news, One of the bankís general manager has been
appointed in DRT, Coimbatore District & advocates protested against the immoral
appointment of such in Judicial area, things brought back to systems after
boycott and brought this to media, and there were unique rules created to
regulate the procedures of such tribunals.
These Tribunals has played a vital role in resolving the disputes with unique
procedures on their own and discharged the cases on fast track but most of the
decisions typically challenged in Apex Courts. Those case were reviewed in the
High Courtís under Article 226 of Constitution of India and the Apex courts has
issued set aside the order, quashed the order given by Tribunals after a careful
assessment that the Tribunals has overlooked the principle of natural justice,
equity and directed/ tuned the tribunals to establishing a proper system and the
Apex court found that these Tribunals acted against the principle of natural
justice and bias to the Government agencies such as banks, commercial companies
in faster recovery of debts.
More ever, Apex courts intervention made adverse results in last decade and
Government has established several bills, acts, rules, policies for reducing the
intervention of High Court and those let the Tribunals free from the clutches of
There, where one has to pay for his debts (even the debt heavily boosted by
authorities), or can be preyed by the authorities/Tribunals, and none can file
for specific relief against Tribunals if though, it will not be maintainable by
Other petitions to Supreme Courts:
The superior court of India has not only the appeal petitions from the
Tribunals, but also the look after the appeals from the high courts, and also
receiving the millions of petitions filed by the citizens under the article 32
of Constitution of India and discharge all cases at the earliest. The backlog
cases of cases has related the acceptance of the petition by the registrar where
none could be blamed for any rejection since such rejection is related to the
population who can be served, deserved by the priority, integrity and also the
impact on the society.
The only Choice for the alleged person, now approaching the Supreme Court of
India BUT, question of facts:
- Whether One and Only Supreme Court of India is reachable for these
common men and women of 1.3 Million population?
- Whether is feasible to file such Appeals in Courts, which when, those
being refused in High Courts
- Would it be affordable for any men or women across the country to file,
especially for the major population under the below poverty line?
The Lecture Reviews: Population & Court Establishments
- Highly Occupied Courts
There are 544 district courts, 25 High courts with 1 Supreme Court in the
country, where these courts has to deal the cases across the countries with a
population of 1.3 billion.
The ratio of occupancy with refer to Total population as below:
1 Supreme Court : 130,00,00,000
25 High Courts: 5,20,00,000 each
544 District and subordinate courts (Total of 16,845): 23,89,700 each
Referring to Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, in 2019 there were pending
cases sited https://thewire.in/law/pending-court-cases:
- Pending cases in Supreme Court were 59,867 cases
- Pending cases in High Courts were 44, 75, 000 cases
- Pending cases in District and Subordinate courts were 3, 14, 00,000
The Supreme Court of India has totally out of reach for any Indian, where
extremely costly for common men and women across the country, especially for the
people of southern states, like Tamilnadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Andrapradesh,
Telungana and other UTs. Otherwise, the supremacy will not be reachable to all
the branches of all states.
It is possible for anyone to file a Writ Petition before Supreme Court of India,
pleading the need of Supreme Court benches in Chennai or Bangalore, under
Yes, it is.
Article 14 of the Indian Constitution reads as follows: "Equality before Law Ė
The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law and the equal
protection of the laws within the territory of India." The words "equal
protection of laws" indicates two things: Firstly that every person is entitled
to protection of all the laws of the land, and secondly, every person within
Indian territory is equally entitled to that protection.
It may be interpreted by some of the jurists that the all courts can be
affordable to all citizens, especially constitution allowed the common men to
reach the supreme court under article 32.
Question of Law:
When Madras High Court has Madurai bench to manage the population of Tamilnadu
state, Supreme Court may provisions to establish their additional bench in India
to manage the 1.38 billion population; any citizen whoís going to such credit to
file petition may be supported by billions directly and indirectly.
- Some Legislators take initiatives?
- Suo moto case taken by court itself? Or,
- Some citizen of India who stand for society file writ before Supreme
Brain Storming in Examine the Reliability of Tribunal Judiciary:
Data source taken from UID, base on May 31. 2020 for Research Studies
Graph of State Population in specified High Court Jurisdictions
||Name Of State
||High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati
||Gauhati High Court, Itannagar
||Gauhati High Court, Itannagar
||Patna High Court, Patna
||High Court of Chhattisgarh, Raipur
||High Court of Bombay, at Goa
||High Court of Gujarat
||High Court of Chandigarh
||High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla
||High Court of Jharkhand
||High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru
||Kerala High Court
||Madhya Pradesh High Court
||Bombay High Court, Mumbai
||High Court of Manipur, Imphal
||Gauhati High Court Aizawl Branch
||Gauhati High Court
||Orissa High Court
||Chandigarh High Court
||Rajasthan High Court
||High Court of Sikkim
||Madras High Court, Chennai
||High Court for Telangana, Hyderabad
||High Court of Tripura
||Allagabhad High Court
||High Court of Uttarakhand
||Calcutta High Court
Graph of UT Population in specified High Court Jurisdiction in India
||Name Of Union Territory
||Andaman and Nicobar Islands
||Kolkata High Court, Kolkata
||High Court Chandigarh, Chandigarh
||Dadra and Nagar Haveli
||Bombay High Court, Mumbai
||Daman and Diu
||Bombay High Court, Mumbai
||High Court of Delhi, New Delhi
||High Court of Kerala, Cochin
||Madras High Court, Chennai
||High Court of J&k, Srinagar
State Population as per the Unique Identification Aathaar on May 2020 data
approximately about 1383005686.
There are 24 High Courts has jurisdiction over of 28 States along with 8 Union
Territories, and has under the Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India
for 1.38 billion People.
Question of Facts:
Does the higher state population requires a additional bench?
- If so, why Tamilnadu with population over 8 crore, does have Madurai bench for
Madras High Court?
- WHEN the concept of population decides the high court additional bench
requirement, Uttar Pradesh with population over 23 crore, should have
additional bench in deed.
If this research is being recognized base on systematic research, the first
requirement for Allagabhad High Court should has additional bench before we
think of implementing the additional bench to supreme court where the Human
Rights cases over warmed population in the states of Uttar Pradesh.
Does Two or more states can share one High Court, if their population is
- Chandigarh High Court has covered Punjab and Haryana States
- Madras High Court has covered Tamilnadu and Pondicherry
- High Court of Kerala has covered Kerala and Lakshadweep.
- Guwahati High Court has covered Arunachal, Assam, Mizoram and Nagaland
- High Court of Bombay has covered Maharashtra and Goa.
- WHEN the consolidated population of two or more states to set one High
court Jurisdiction, there the area of the states are considered alternative
factor for reach ability and better administration.
Does the Population Ratio Vs High Courts set right?
- If 24 High Courts in India has managing the Indian Territory with the
population of 1383005686 people, the right ration for High Court should be
24 High Courts ; 138 Crore
1 High Court : 5.76 Crore
WHEN, the 5.76 Crore population requires 1 High Court and when exceeding this
population, a High Court requires additional bench for better administration for
them self or better reach ability for the people.
Would It be possible for 1 Supreme Court succeed in giving Judicial remedy as
per the article 14 to the 138 crore population with an Additional Bench?
I should not narrate any bias statement, for the sake of this article since
Supreme Court of India is not only the Supreme but which conferred the right of
common men by several judgments and has done several judicial reviews and being
one of best citizen care court, among other country courts.
The judicial review of Supreme Court of India and conferred the rights of common
man during the period of Emergency, Former Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi is
highly effective to bring the democracy back to India and where legislators has
been restrained to modify the fundamental rights of the citizen by any acts and
supreme court of India conferred the rights till and played a important role and
protect the citizen successfully and no doubt that the citizen obtained best
remedy against any arbitrary arrest and proceeding for several years.
However, the feasibility question for the people to reach the Supreme Court in
the political, economical and social aspects states that Supreme Court of India
has been out of reach for some of significant population from South India and
this required separate research, however the constrains and upcoming challenges
has been quoted as below.
The Southern part of India, has superior advantages in developing the secularism
ever since, the Union has been divided into diversified states based on the
languages. Though constitution of the country has guaranteed the people with
fundamental rights, the federalism of the central has no significant control
over the southern states where the southern state political parties like DMK,
ADMK, TSP, YSR congress, Janatha dal has well established as state parties over
30 years and continue to be biggest bottle neck and barriers to the entry of
National Parties in the southern states of India.
The Southern India has been
out of reach, not only by geographical reasons but also the political reasons
beyond the coverage of legal system. The establishment of Supreme Court with
additional bench in south, may be one of the entry to bring the state under the
perusal of central governance. Government of India, initiative to create
additional bench will be more unique rather than any citizen pleading the same
before the supreme court of India.
India as sub continent, It is the seventh-largest country in the world, with
a total area of 3,287,263 square kilometres (1,269,219 sq mi) and Supreme Court
of India at itís geographical location and jurisdiction. Despite of the Souther
states, There are union territories as islands and they were no records to trace
how many cases taken up to Superior courts. According to the recent surveys, the
cases filed by the southern states to Supreme Court where far less than the
petitions filed by the northern states and it doesnít mean that southern street
has not had any appeals but in reality of facts, the southern state people has
less reach ability to the Supreme Court of India due to other reasons, mainly
the affordability of the common men to reach the doors of Supreme Court of
Indian courts have being well managed by procedures for over 200 years despite
of the distance of the country; where all the courts following uniform
procedures throughout India for preserving the data, records and decisions. The
modern Internet Era has influenced the Indian courts to upgrade them with modern
technology for processing the functions, slowly, gradually and but not firmly
due to the upraising secular policies of the state.
If you examine the affordability in filing any petitions, you will be surprised
how much difficult to reach the supreme court for common men and women and
thatís going to make every one think, the significant importance of the
additional bench establishment in India for better Governance.
Would this can be task of the legislative parliamentary headed by Prime Minister
to establishment of courts?
Or, Would this can be task of Judicial supremacy headed by Chief Justice of
Or, Would this can be task of common men, filing a petition before Supreme Court
for appropriate remeady?
Written By: Ravikumar Vellingiri,
Researcher trying to obtain your feedback of this article and you may post you
feed back to [email protected]