ഷെട്ടി കമ്മീഷന് റിപ്പോര്ട്ട് 10
ഷെട്ടി കമ്മീഷന് റിപ്പോര്ട്ട്പാര്ട്ട് മുഴുവനും വായിക്കാന് വലതുവശം പോസ്റ്റ് ടൈറ്റിലില് പോയി ലിങ്കില് ക്ലിക്ക് ചെയ്യുക
B. Computer usage to assist Judicial functioning
i. Apart from supporting effective operation of primary activities, computers may assist judges in the court room and for generation of orders through
a) Word processing with provision of standard templates,
b) Online availability of case files including pleadings, affidavits, orders and documents and full case histories,
c) Case Tracking and Monitoring,
d) Access to databases of relevant law and relevant legal precedents, and
e) Vital feedback information for corrective action at all levels of the judiciary.
Some of the above applications do not need special software development. They may use standard software packages available for these purposes. However proper evaluation, effective installation and training would have to be undertaken.
ii. The "Check Slip" should be the beginning point for simplification to help data processing.
C. Legal Assistance Kiosks
Legal information Kiosks may be installed at court premises to provide assistance to public. Such Kiosks may provide guidance on basic procedures, information on availability of ADR schemes and legal assistance. These should be networked with suitable security provisions to the computers being used for operational systems so that read - only facility of querying on the status of pending cases can be provided. At later stages they may provide data entry facilities for computer based submissions. Such services will greatly facilitate public interaction with legal systems and also demonstrate the concern of the courts for the public at large.
D. Comprehensive Plan for Implementation
i. An extensive program of computerization across the entire country should be undertaken by a Task Force after development of a comprehensive plan for installation of hardware and software and their effective usage. An Action Plan should be drawn up. The Government of India's Action Plan for IT announced in 1998 and the Prime Minister's Task Force set up for this purpose should include Judiciary as one of the areas requiring the urgent attention of the government for introduction of IT.
ii. Such a Plan must not be limited to installation of hardware and software. An analysis of process performance for possibilities of re-engineering must be undertaken as part of the task.
iii. Changes in organisational practises and regulations, reassignments of roles and responsibilities, work methods and performance criteria will have to be undertaken as part of the task.
iv. Changes in organisational practises, training of Judicial and other personnel in the use of computer-based systems and new work methods in dealing with new systems arising from re-engineered work are urgent, essential reforms.
WORK DONE BY THE NIC :
25.18 From the Brochure received from the Government of India, Planning Commission, National Informatics Centre, New Delhi, it will be seen that there appears to be one uniform method evolved by NIC for 'District Courts Computerisation and Networking Programme'.
25.19 It is said that NIC has received a report from 430 District Courts in the country that the implementation of IT is satisfactory in such Courts.
25.20 We have personally verified the steps taken regarding the implementation of IT in some of the District Courts in Karnataka Stage. We find that in almost all such Districts, what has been done is only the installation of hardware without any programme for training the concerned Judicial Officers or the Court Staff. In fact, in many District Courts, we find that the room in which the computers are located is locked. Perhaps, without knowing how to operate.
25.21 From the feedback information that we have received and also from the discussion in the National Consultative Activity, which we have referred to earlier, it is seen that there is hardly any progress in the implementation of IT in District Courts or in the Courts subordinate thereto, save in Gujarat and Maharashtra States.
25.22 In this context, reference may be made to the experience gained by the Gujarat State Judicial Academy of which Mr. Justice R.A. Mehta (Rtd.) is the Director. He has highlighted the following activities which could be computerised for the subordinate Judiciary :
1. Internet and Online access to users and Lawyers.
2. Bulletin Board Service (BBS), File Transfer (FTP).
3. CD Servers for legal data-bases JUDIS, India Code, Gujarat Case Law, Gujarat Code, JURIX, Lexis, Nexis.
4. Application Servers.
5. Data Servers.
6. Internet Server (ISP).
7. HC Web site, Web page.
8. VSAT & District Court & other HC, SC connectivity, Online access.
9. Comprehensive Case Information System CCIS, Judgments, Orders, Notices, MIS & Statistical Reports.
10. About 50 Forms and merging of data from CCIS.
11. Admn.Departments A,B,C,D, B Spl. Depts.
12. Files-Classification, file names and files, directories.
13. File movements - Bar Code readers.
14. Agenda of meetings of Committees, Standing Committee and Full Court.
15. Minutes of Decisions of meetings.
16. Pay Roll, Pay slips.
17. Personal Information.
18. Judicial Officers-Personal Information.
19. Confidential reports and Adverse remarks.
20. Assessment of Disposals.
21. Complaints and Inquiries.
22. Lower Court Returns and Statistics, online reports and compilation.
23. Seniority Lists of Judicial Officers, Staff.
24. Transfers of Judicial Officers.
25. Accounts, Cheques.
26. Inventory.
27. Fixed Deposits.
28. Library - Catalogue, issue and movement of books.
29. Telephone and Address Directory.
30. Mailing Lists.
31. Legal Aid and Services.
32. Vigilance.
33. Law Officer Branch.
34. Rules Recruitment Rules, HC Rules, Judicial Service Rules.
35. HC Judges Act-Rules.
36. Notifications, Circulars by HC.
37. Pension and Retirement Benefits and automatic calculations.
38. Leave Accounts - automatic calculations.
39. Personal files of Judges and individuals and security.
40. Linkage of judicial and non judicial files.
41. Organisation Charts.
42. Work flow charts.
43. Flow Charts of activities.
44. Flow Charts of case.
45. Flow Charts of Acts and Rules.
46. Decree Dept. documents/forms.
47. Record Room, Criminal, Civil and OJ.
48. Scrutiny of each department, each Judge and Officer's works and data.
25.23 OUR RECOMMENDATIONS :
i. The Commission recommends that each High Court should immediately constitute a Task Force consisting of Senior Judges of the High Court and a computer expert for preparing a comprehensive action plan for implementation of IT in District Court and Courts subordinate thereto.
ii. Such a Plan should not be limited to installation of hardware and software. An analysis of process performance for possibilities of re-engineering must also be undertaken as part of the task.
iii. Changes in organisational practices and regulations, reassignments of rules and responsibilities, work methods and performance criteria will have to be periodically undertaken by the Task Force.
iv. The training of Judicial and other personnel in the use of computer-based systems and new work methods in dealing with new systems arising from re-engineered work must also be undertaken simultaneously.
v. The National Informatics Centre (NIC) perhaps due to inadequate / insufficient resources - manpower and financial - has not been able to develop a needed package for all the District Courts in India in a short time-frame.
Each High Court must immediately inform the Government of India to entrust to private software firms on a competitive tender basis for computerisation and networking programme of District Courts and Courts subordinate thereto.
* * * * *
ANNEXURE - I
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL CONSULTATIVE ACTIVITY ON JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING; AND I.T. FOR JUDICIARY HELD ON 12th AND 13th DECEMBER 1998
First National Judicial Pay Commission (Commission) in association with the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore convened a National Consultative Activity on 12th and 13th December 1998 at Indian Institute of Management Auditorium, Bangalore to consider and approve the two Draft Reports prepared by the Commission. The two reports pertain to:
i) Judicial Education and Training, and
ii) Information Technology for Judiciary
The Activity was inaugurated by Hon’ble Sri Justice B.N. Kirpal, Judge of the Supreme Court of India and presided over by Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty (Rtd.), the Chairman of the Commission, Justice R.P. Sethi, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court was the Chief Guest.
The Senior Judges of most of the High Courts, the Director of IIM, Bangalore, the Directors of the Judicial Training Institutes of every State, Director of National Police Academy, Legal Luminaries, Professors of Law and Management and Representatives of the Judicial Officers’ Associations attended the Meetings.
In the Technical Sessions in which methodology of introduction of IT in Subordinate Courts was examined, it was found that there is no way out to speed up the course of justice save by computerisation of Subordinate Courts all over the country.
The recommendations of the ‘TASK FORCE’ constituted by the Prime Minister for "Information Technology Action Plan" for all Governmental and non-Governmental levels were perused and found that Judiciary has not been included therein.
WHEREFORE, it is unanimously resolved :
1. "That the Information Technology Action Plan" must include computerisation of the Subordinate Judiciary all over the country. And
2. the Chairman of FNJPC is authorised to take necessary steps by moving the Prime Minister and Chief Justice of India to take up the matter with Government of India.
Accordingly, the Chairman has written to the Prime Minister of India as well as the Chief Justice of the Apex Court for appropriate action in this respect.
* * * * *
ANNEXURE - II
No. 55/DGCNIC/99-43
Government of India
Planning Commission
National Informatics centre
New Delhi – 110 003
Dt. : February 4, 1999
Subject : Inclusion of Subordinate judiciary in the Information Technology Action Plan.
Under the District Courts Computerisation and networking Programme, the National Informatics Centre (NIC) has already covered implementation of IT in all the 430 District Courts in the country. NIC has received satisfactory support from the District Courts. Under this project considering the availability of funds we could cover up to the level of District Judges and equivalent rank Judges only. Kindly find the enclosed brochure for further details.
The IT Task Force- ‘Working Group on Citizen Interface’ has already considered ‘IT for Judiciary’ in its draft report. Further, the resolution passed by the ‘First National Judicial Pay Commission’ has been forwarded to the Working Group for necessary action.
Sd/-
(N. Seshagiri)
Special Secretary & Director General
Copy forwarded to :
(i) Hon’ble Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty (Rtd.), Chairman, First National Judicial Pay Commission, Bangalore, No. FNJPC/CON/12/98, dated 16 Dec ’98.
(ii) Member Secretary, Planning Commission, No. –nil- dated 28, Jan ’99.
(iii) Addl. Secretary, Deptt. of Justice, PMO U.O. No. 360/31/C/10/98-ES.II. dated 1, Jan ’99.
(iv) K. Srinivasan, Prl. Adviser (C&I), Planning Commission, I.D. No. p-12040/5/98-C&I dated 2-2-1999.
(v) P.K. Agarwal, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice, No. 15014/2/99-JUS (M) dated 28, Jan ’99.
F F F F F
ANNEXURE - III
24. District Courts Computerization and
Networking Programme
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
High Court of Allahabad High Court of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Bombay Calcutta High Court
High Court of Delhi Gauhati High Court
High Court of Himachal Pradesh High Court of Jammu & Kashmir
High Court of Karnataka High Court of Kerala
Madras High Court High Court of Madhya Pradesh
High Court of Punjab & Haryana High Court of Orissa
High Court of Patna Rajasthan High Court
High Court of Sikkim
AND
NATIONAL INFORMATICS CENTRE
INTRODUCTION :
The National Informatics Centre has been giving information Technology support to the Indian Judiciary for over six years. The successful implementation of an information system assisting the registry of the Supreme Court of India in decision making, marked NIC’s first step towards computerisation of Courts. This was closely followed by the computerisation of all High Courts in 1992. Today all High Courts have been computerised and interconnected through NII’s satellite based computer communication network (NICNET); most of them are taking out computer generated Daily Cause Lists. COURTNIC and NICNET have enabled the ready availability of information on pending cases in the Supreme Court at any of the over thousand VSAT nodes of NICNET spread across the country. The JUDIS, the Judgment Information System, archeives all reported cases of Supreme Court right from 1950 onwards and makes it available on NICNET. The complete JUDIS database is now encapsuled in a CD-ROM for ready retrieval. As a logical next step in NIC’s effort is the District Court Computerisation and networking project which helps streamlining the Judicial administration in the lower courts.
PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES
The main goal of the District Courts Computerisation and Networking Programme is introducing Information Technology Tools in all areas which are routine and time critical in nature, streamlining the District Judicial Administration and bring about transparency of information to the litigants. The following are the objectives of the project :-
Objectives – 1
o Streamlining judicial administration by computer assisted ‘monitoring of case filing’ by the litigants / advocates.
o Keeping track of movement of case files in the Court.
o Providing Computer-based querying facilities to litigants / advocates
Objectives – 2
o Interconnection of all District Courts, the 18 High Courts and the Supreme Court. Providing e-mail facility among all courts and facilitating the day-to-day interaction with the High Court through NICNET.
Objectives – 3
o Giving access to local, National and International legal databases for the District Judges over NICNET and INTERNET.
APPLICATION AREAS
Based on the experience gained by NIC from computerization and networking of the Supreme Court and all the 18 High Courts in the country, the following areas were identified for computerisation in all the 430 District Courts.
1. Case File Monitoring
2. Certified Copies
3. Report Generation
4. Library and Database Resource Sharing
5. E-Mail Facility
6. Personnel Information System
7. Pay Roll and Accounts Processing
CASE FILE MONITORING SYSTEM
The computerisation of District Courts envisages a centralised Filing Counter for streamlining the entire activity of filing process. As soon as a case is filed at the filing counter, the computer decides the posting of the case to a judge based on the existing procedure. It will automatically register the case in the District Court and produce a receipt to the litigant / advocate. At the end of each day the computer will generate a list of cases filed on that day in a format similar to the one maintained in a Register, as is the practice. For avoiding the litigants dealing with a multitude of sections for finding out their case status, a query counter is being opened at the Filing Counter. The preliminary details entered in the computer system will be made available immediately at the computer terminal provided in each court room. The judge can have a list of cases posted by the computer on that date in his court.
The terminal provided in each court room along with a printer will substitute the type-writer. When a case is heard by the judge, the order issued by him will be entered straightway into the computer terminal by the clerk concerned. As the computer system will be storing the orders of the court, any further modification suggested by the judge can easily be carried out in the system within a short time. A copy of the order can also be taken from the printer attached to the computer terminal. The staff of the court will update the database by feeding the operative part of the judgment on the computer system. It will ensure that the matter will come on the board on the date given by the Judge. If a notice is required to be served, the computer system will automatically generate the same and also immediately make it available at the query counter terminal.
CERTIFIED COPIES
As all terminals are connected to the main system in LAN any order/judgment that is typed from any court room, will be automatically available on the LAN. The query terminals at the Filing Counter can be used for generation of print-outs of the orders/judgments as certified copies to the litigants. These computer printed orders of courts are to be signed by an officer before they are issued to parties. In this process there would not be any delay in getting certified copies. This will certainly help in generating the certified copies without delay.
All routine notices, orders etc., can be produced from the computer terminal as the computer system has the formats of various notices and addresses of the parties, it can automatically generate various types of notices.
FAST REPORT GENERATION
The following reports can be generated by the Software
o List of cases filed on a particular date
o List of cases heard/disposed of by a judge on a particular day
o Statistical reports required by the District Court authorities.
BENEFITS
District Court Computerisation and Networking Programme will benefit the management, the judges, the advocates and the litigants alike :
o Monitoring of case flow will be easy
o Litigants, Advocates get case related information at one place
o Posting of cases to various courts will be transparent
o Litigants can get certified copies instantaneously
o Accurate statistical information can be generated
o Cause Lists for each court can be generated automatically
o Caveat Matching will take place at the filing stage itself
o All required notices can be generated automatically
o Preparation of orders/judgments becomes simpler
o Introduction of IT Tools will bring an innovative approach and a better work culture in the District Court.
o National and International legal databases will be readily available to judges, advocates and litigants.
o E-Mail and Internet facilities will be available to every district court.
For further information contact :
Courts Informatics Division
National Informatics Center
A-Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
Grams : NICNET HQ
Ph:4364292 Fax :91-11-4362489, 4362628
e-mail :clmr@caselaw.delhi.nic.in
26. ALL INDIA JUDICIAL SERVICE
26.1 Our terms of reference do not require us to indicate the methodology of constituting the All India Judicial Service. It is the responsibility of the Central Government as per decision of the Supreme Court in the All India Judges' Case 1. The Supreme Court observed as follows :
"We are of the view that the Law Commission's recommendation should not have been dropped lightly. There is considerable force and merit in the view expressed by the Law Commission. An All India Judicial Service essentially for manning the higher services in the subordinate judiciary is very much necessary. The reasons advanced by the Law Commission for recommending the setting up of an All India Judicial Service appeal to us.
Since the setting up of such a service might require amendment of the relevant Articles of the Constitution of the Service Rules operating in the different States and Union Territories, we do not intend to give any particular direction on this score particularly when the point was not seriously pressed but we would commend to the Union of India to undertake appropriate exercise quickly so that the feasibility of implementation of the recommendations of the Law Commission may be examined expeditiously and implemented as early as possible. It is in the interest of the health of the judiciary throughout the country that this should be done."
1. AIR 1992 SC 165.
26.2 We have received the status report from the Government of India on the proposal of constituting the All India Judicial Service. The status report dated 10-2-1997 runs as follows :
"The Supreme Court of India in the Writ Petition (Civil) No.1022 of 1989 between All India Judges Association Versus Union of India in its judgment dated 10th April, 1995 has given the direction to Union of India to take immediate measures for the implementation of the direction, to achieve the objective of setting up of All India Judicial Service. Since a Resolution will have to be moved in the Rajya Sabha in this regard, the Government has sought the views of the State Governments / High Courts in the matter.
2. So far we have received comments from 23 States. Comments are still awaited from Governments of Meghalaya and Bihar. The State Governments of Goa, U.P., Mizoram, Punjab, Kerala, Tripura, Sikkim and Orissa agree with the setting up of an All India Judicial Service. The Governments of Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Assam and Rajasthan have given a conditional approval to the proposal. The State Governments of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Karnataka, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur and Andhra Pradesh have not favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service.
3. Of the 18 High Courts, we have received the views - comments of 16 High Courts. Views of the Calcutta High Court and the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir are awaited. The High Courts of Allahabad, Patna, Guwahati and Rajasthan have favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service. The High Courts of Orissa, Sikkim, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala have given their conditional approval to the proposal. The High Courts of Mumbai, Karnataka, Gujarat, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh have no views to offer in this regard in the light of Supreme Court judgment. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab and Madras have not favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service.
4. In the light of the recommendation of the Law Commission of India, direction of the Supreme Court and views / comments of the State Governments / High Courts, the question of setting up All India Judicial Service through a resolution of the Rajya Sabha and an enactment of Parliament under article 312 of the Constitution is under consideration."
26.3 The Commission in order to assist the Central Government wanted to ascertain the views of the High Courts and State Governments as to the qualifications and method of recruitment to All India Judicial Service. The Commission circulated the following question :
"Q.No.70 The States Reorganisation Commission has observed that creation of All India Service would be a major compelling necessity for the Nation and it has suggested that a proportion of the Higher Judiciary should be recruited by competitive examination at All India Level so as to attract the best of our young graduates to the Judicial Service. The Law Commission of India has in its 14th Report emphasised the need to establish the All India Judicial Service.
The Supreme Court has unequivocally stated that it is in the interest of the health of the judiciary throughout the country that an All India Judicial Service should be constituted. The Supreme Court has, however, left the matter to the Union of India to undertake quickly appropriate exercise in that regard. Please set out the qualifications and method of recruitment to All India Judicial Service?
26.4 Responses received from the High Courts and State Governments may briefly be summarised as follows :
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :
26.4.1 All India Judicial Services (AIJS) will be composed of Officers selected on All India basis and allotted to State cadre, to remain in that State to ensure the effective control of the High Court in the interest of judicial administration. The initial entry to the AIJS should be to the cadre of Subordinate Judge/Asst. Sessions Judge / Civil Judge (Senior Division). 60% posts in the cadre of Sub-Judges should be allocated directly to the cadre of AIJS. The inservice Judicial Officers may also be permitted to compete for AIJS. There should be a Committee for selection consisting of two Chief Justices of High Courts, one Judge of the Supreme Court, Director of National Judicial Academy and Chairman, UPSC.
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :
26.4.2 Government of Andhra Pradesh is not in favour of constitution of AIJS.
PATNA HIGH COURT :
26.4.3 Qualification for recruitment to AIJS should be law graduate and experience of one year at the Bar.
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AND GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT :
26.4.4 Oppose to setting up of AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR :
26.4.5 No comments.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA :
26.4.6 Not furnished reply.
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA :
26.4.7 Opposes the constitution of AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AND GOVERNMENT OF KERALA :
26.4.8 No comments.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :
26.4.9 Candidates with practice of not less than seven years with the maximum age limit of 40 years should alone be considered for AIJS and 40% of the sanctioned strength is to be filled up by direct recruitment.
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY :
26.4.10 Views on AIJS can be expressed only when the Government of India makes a decision as to how it is going to carry out the exercise of constituting the AIJS.
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA :
26.4.11 Seven years practice as an Advocate should be prescribed for AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA :
26.4.12 The recruitment should be akin to the Indian Civil Service Examination and qualification for recruitment should be LL.B degree.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA :
26.4.13 Not in favour of formation of AIJS, as it will negate the control of the High Court under Article 235 of the Constitution. If created, it may be on par with the Central Services such as IAS, IPS, IFS etc.
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT :
26.4.14 AIJS should consist of promotees to the higher judiciary from the subordinate judiciary of the State only and for direct recruits, 7 years Bar practice should be prescribed with the minimum age of 35 years. Inservice people should be allowed to compete for AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS AND GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU :
26.4.15 Not in favour of AIJS.
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT AND GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH :
26.4.16 AIJS can be constituted by absorbing all the existing members of the State Judicial Service on the lines of IFS (Indian Forest Service). Thereafter, recruitment should be made through National Judicial Service Commission. Fresh law graduates should be allowed to compete.
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT :
26.4.17 AIJS has to be constituted in terms of the Constitution and observations of the Supreme Court and the Law Commission. Recruitment must be by the National Judicial Service Commission. The age limit may be 30 to 33 years and qualification for recruitment must be a degree in law.
GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL :
26.4.18 Not in favour of AIJS.
26.5 It will be seen from the above comments and views that some High Courts and State Governments are of the view that the power of control under Article 235 of the Constitution will be belittled if AIJS is constituted. They are perhaps under the impression that AIJS is an independent Service, unconnected with the State Judicial Service.
SERVICE ASSOCIATIONS :
26.6 Invariably, Officers' Associations have opposed the formation of AIJS, perhaps on the ground that their seniority will be affected and their chances of promotion will be diminished.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS :
26.7 In our opinion, it is necessary to allay these apprehensions while constituting AIJS. Bearing that in mind, we indicate herein the broad outlines for consideration of the Central Government for constituting the AIJS :
(i) The AIJS could be constituted only in the cadre of District Judges as per the provisions of Article 312(3) of the Constitution. The District Judges directly recruited and promoted should constitute the AIJS.
(ii) The selection for direct recruitment should be by National Judicial commission / UPSC and promotees by the respective High Courts.
(iii) The qualification for direct recruitment to AIJS should be in conformity with that prescribed under Article 233(2) of the Constitution - i.e., Advocate / Pleader who has got not less than 7 years Bar practice.
(iv) Service Judges also should be allowed to compete for recruitment to AIJS, by appropriately amending Article 233(2) of the Constitution. (See V.II, Chapter 11).
(v) Not exceeding 25% of the posts in the cadre of District Judges in every State should be ear-marked for direct recruitment.
(vi) The age limit for recruitment to AIJS should be between 35 and 45 years.
(vii) The procedure for selection shall be by written examination followed by viva voce.
(See: V. II, Chapter 10).
(viii) Appointment : The National Judicial Commission / UPSC, after selecting the candidates for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judges, must allocate to the States / UTs, the candidates equal to the vacancies that are surrendered by them. The High Court thereupon will recommend those names to the Governor for appointment as per Article 233 of the Constitution.
(ix) Training : The prescribed training is only after appointment.
(x) Seniority : All India Seniority is as per the ranking in the select list..
(xi) Inter-se Seniority in the State / UT : The inter-se seniority between the direct recruits and promotees shall be determined according to the date of allotment and date of promotion.
(xii) Such direct recruits must thus be annexed to the respective State Judicial Service within the three-tier system.
(xiii) Court Language : The recording of the deposition in all Courts should be in two languages - (i) Regional language (to be recorded by the Court Officer); and (ii) English (by the Presiding Officer).
26.8 We are of the opinion that, if the AIJS is constituted in the manner indicated, the apprehension of the High Courts, the Service Judges and the Governments could be minimised, if not totally eliminated.
* * * * *
ഷെട്ടി കമ്മീഷന് റിപ്പോര്ട്ട്പാര്ട്ട് മുഴുവനും വായിക്കാന് വലതുവശം പോസ്റ്റ് ടൈറ്റിലില് പോയി ലിങ്കില് ക്ലിക്ക് ചെയ്യുക
B. Computer usage to assist Judicial functioning
i. Apart from supporting effective operation of primary activities, computers may assist judges in the court room and for generation of orders through
a) Word processing with provision of standard templates,
b) Online availability of case files including pleadings, affidavits, orders and documents and full case histories,
c) Case Tracking and Monitoring,
d) Access to databases of relevant law and relevant legal precedents, and
e) Vital feedback information for corrective action at all levels of the judiciary.
Some of the above applications do not need special software development. They may use standard software packages available for these purposes. However proper evaluation, effective installation and training would have to be undertaken.
ii. The "Check Slip" should be the beginning point for simplification to help data processing.
C. Legal Assistance Kiosks
Legal information Kiosks may be installed at court premises to provide assistance to public. Such Kiosks may provide guidance on basic procedures, information on availability of ADR schemes and legal assistance. These should be networked with suitable security provisions to the computers being used for operational systems so that read - only facility of querying on the status of pending cases can be provided. At later stages they may provide data entry facilities for computer based submissions. Such services will greatly facilitate public interaction with legal systems and also demonstrate the concern of the courts for the public at large.
D. Comprehensive Plan for Implementation
i. An extensive program of computerization across the entire country should be undertaken by a Task Force after development of a comprehensive plan for installation of hardware and software and their effective usage. An Action Plan should be drawn up. The Government of India's Action Plan for IT announced in 1998 and the Prime Minister's Task Force set up for this purpose should include Judiciary as one of the areas requiring the urgent attention of the government for introduction of IT.
ii. Such a Plan must not be limited to installation of hardware and software. An analysis of process performance for possibilities of re-engineering must be undertaken as part of the task.
iii. Changes in organisational practises and regulations, reassignments of roles and responsibilities, work methods and performance criteria will have to be undertaken as part of the task.
iv. Changes in organisational practises, training of Judicial and other personnel in the use of computer-based systems and new work methods in dealing with new systems arising from re-engineered work are urgent, essential reforms.
WORK DONE BY THE NIC :
25.18 From the Brochure received from the Government of India, Planning Commission, National Informatics Centre, New Delhi, it will be seen that there appears to be one uniform method evolved by NIC for 'District Courts Computerisation and Networking Programme'.
25.19 It is said that NIC has received a report from 430 District Courts in the country that the implementation of IT is satisfactory in such Courts.
25.20 We have personally verified the steps taken regarding the implementation of IT in some of the District Courts in Karnataka Stage. We find that in almost all such Districts, what has been done is only the installation of hardware without any programme for training the concerned Judicial Officers or the Court Staff. In fact, in many District Courts, we find that the room in which the computers are located is locked. Perhaps, without knowing how to operate.
25.21 From the feedback information that we have received and also from the discussion in the National Consultative Activity, which we have referred to earlier, it is seen that there is hardly any progress in the implementation of IT in District Courts or in the Courts subordinate thereto, save in Gujarat and Maharashtra States.
25.22 In this context, reference may be made to the experience gained by the Gujarat State Judicial Academy of which Mr. Justice R.A. Mehta (Rtd.) is the Director. He has highlighted the following activities which could be computerised for the subordinate Judiciary :
1. Internet and Online access to users and Lawyers.
2. Bulletin Board Service (BBS), File Transfer (FTP).
3. CD Servers for legal data-bases JUDIS, India Code, Gujarat Case Law, Gujarat Code, JURIX, Lexis, Nexis.
4. Application Servers.
5. Data Servers.
6. Internet Server (ISP).
7. HC Web site, Web page.
8. VSAT & District Court & other HC, SC connectivity, Online access.
9. Comprehensive Case Information System CCIS, Judgments, Orders, Notices, MIS & Statistical Reports.
10. About 50 Forms and merging of data from CCIS.
11. Admn.Departments A,B,C,D, B Spl. Depts.
12. Files-Classification, file names and files, directories.
13. File movements - Bar Code readers.
14. Agenda of meetings of Committees, Standing Committee and Full Court.
15. Minutes of Decisions of meetings.
16. Pay Roll, Pay slips.
17. Personal Information.
18. Judicial Officers-Personal Information.
19. Confidential reports and Adverse remarks.
20. Assessment of Disposals.
21. Complaints and Inquiries.
22. Lower Court Returns and Statistics, online reports and compilation.
23. Seniority Lists of Judicial Officers, Staff.
24. Transfers of Judicial Officers.
25. Accounts, Cheques.
26. Inventory.
27. Fixed Deposits.
28. Library - Catalogue, issue and movement of books.
29. Telephone and Address Directory.
30. Mailing Lists.
31. Legal Aid and Services.
32. Vigilance.
33. Law Officer Branch.
34. Rules Recruitment Rules, HC Rules, Judicial Service Rules.
35. HC Judges Act-Rules.
36. Notifications, Circulars by HC.
37. Pension and Retirement Benefits and automatic calculations.
38. Leave Accounts - automatic calculations.
39. Personal files of Judges and individuals and security.
40. Linkage of judicial and non judicial files.
41. Organisation Charts.
42. Work flow charts.
43. Flow Charts of activities.
44. Flow Charts of case.
45. Flow Charts of Acts and Rules.
46. Decree Dept. documents/forms.
47. Record Room, Criminal, Civil and OJ.
48. Scrutiny of each department, each Judge and Officer's works and data.
25.23 OUR RECOMMENDATIONS :
i. The Commission recommends that each High Court should immediately constitute a Task Force consisting of Senior Judges of the High Court and a computer expert for preparing a comprehensive action plan for implementation of IT in District Court and Courts subordinate thereto.
ii. Such a Plan should not be limited to installation of hardware and software. An analysis of process performance for possibilities of re-engineering must also be undertaken as part of the task.
iii. Changes in organisational practices and regulations, reassignments of rules and responsibilities, work methods and performance criteria will have to be periodically undertaken by the Task Force.
iv. The training of Judicial and other personnel in the use of computer-based systems and new work methods in dealing with new systems arising from re-engineered work must also be undertaken simultaneously.
v. The National Informatics Centre (NIC) perhaps due to inadequate / insufficient resources - manpower and financial - has not been able to develop a needed package for all the District Courts in India in a short time-frame.
Each High Court must immediately inform the Government of India to entrust to private software firms on a competitive tender basis for computerisation and networking programme of District Courts and Courts subordinate thereto.
* * * * *
ANNEXURE - I
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL CONSULTATIVE ACTIVITY ON JUDICIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING; AND I.T. FOR JUDICIARY HELD ON 12th AND 13th DECEMBER 1998
First National Judicial Pay Commission (Commission) in association with the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore convened a National Consultative Activity on 12th and 13th December 1998 at Indian Institute of Management Auditorium, Bangalore to consider and approve the two Draft Reports prepared by the Commission. The two reports pertain to:
i) Judicial Education and Training, and
ii) Information Technology for Judiciary
The Activity was inaugurated by Hon’ble Sri Justice B.N. Kirpal, Judge of the Supreme Court of India and presided over by Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty (Rtd.), the Chairman of the Commission, Justice R.P. Sethi, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court was the Chief Guest.
The Senior Judges of most of the High Courts, the Director of IIM, Bangalore, the Directors of the Judicial Training Institutes of every State, Director of National Police Academy, Legal Luminaries, Professors of Law and Management and Representatives of the Judicial Officers’ Associations attended the Meetings.
In the Technical Sessions in which methodology of introduction of IT in Subordinate Courts was examined, it was found that there is no way out to speed up the course of justice save by computerisation of Subordinate Courts all over the country.
The recommendations of the ‘TASK FORCE’ constituted by the Prime Minister for "Information Technology Action Plan" for all Governmental and non-Governmental levels were perused and found that Judiciary has not been included therein.
WHEREFORE, it is unanimously resolved :
1. "That the Information Technology Action Plan" must include computerisation of the Subordinate Judiciary all over the country. And
2. the Chairman of FNJPC is authorised to take necessary steps by moving the Prime Minister and Chief Justice of India to take up the matter with Government of India.
Accordingly, the Chairman has written to the Prime Minister of India as well as the Chief Justice of the Apex Court for appropriate action in this respect.
* * * * *
ANNEXURE - II
No. 55/DGCNIC/99-43
Government of India
Planning Commission
National Informatics centre
New Delhi – 110 003
Dt. : February 4, 1999
Subject : Inclusion of Subordinate judiciary in the Information Technology Action Plan.
Under the District Courts Computerisation and networking Programme, the National Informatics Centre (NIC) has already covered implementation of IT in all the 430 District Courts in the country. NIC has received satisfactory support from the District Courts. Under this project considering the availability of funds we could cover up to the level of District Judges and equivalent rank Judges only. Kindly find the enclosed brochure for further details.
The IT Task Force- ‘Working Group on Citizen Interface’ has already considered ‘IT for Judiciary’ in its draft report. Further, the resolution passed by the ‘First National Judicial Pay Commission’ has been forwarded to the Working Group for necessary action.
Sd/-
(N. Seshagiri)
Special Secretary & Director General
Copy forwarded to :
(i) Hon’ble Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty (Rtd.), Chairman, First National Judicial Pay Commission, Bangalore, No. FNJPC/CON/12/98, dated 16 Dec ’98.
(ii) Member Secretary, Planning Commission, No. –nil- dated 28, Jan ’99.
(iii) Addl. Secretary, Deptt. of Justice, PMO U.O. No. 360/31/C/10/98-ES.II. dated 1, Jan ’99.
(iv) K. Srinivasan, Prl. Adviser (C&I), Planning Commission, I.D. No. p-12040/5/98-C&I dated 2-2-1999.
(v) P.K. Agarwal, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice, No. 15014/2/99-JUS (M) dated 28, Jan ’99.
F F F F F
ANNEXURE - III
24. District Courts Computerization and
Networking Programme
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
High Court of Allahabad High Court of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Bombay Calcutta High Court
High Court of Delhi Gauhati High Court
High Court of Himachal Pradesh High Court of Jammu & Kashmir
High Court of Karnataka High Court of Kerala
Madras High Court High Court of Madhya Pradesh
High Court of Punjab & Haryana High Court of Orissa
High Court of Patna Rajasthan High Court
High Court of Sikkim
AND
NATIONAL INFORMATICS CENTRE
INTRODUCTION :
The National Informatics Centre has been giving information Technology support to the Indian Judiciary for over six years. The successful implementation of an information system assisting the registry of the Supreme Court of India in decision making, marked NIC’s first step towards computerisation of Courts. This was closely followed by the computerisation of all High Courts in 1992. Today all High Courts have been computerised and interconnected through NII’s satellite based computer communication network (NICNET); most of them are taking out computer generated Daily Cause Lists. COURTNIC and NICNET have enabled the ready availability of information on pending cases in the Supreme Court at any of the over thousand VSAT nodes of NICNET spread across the country. The JUDIS, the Judgment Information System, archeives all reported cases of Supreme Court right from 1950 onwards and makes it available on NICNET. The complete JUDIS database is now encapsuled in a CD-ROM for ready retrieval. As a logical next step in NIC’s effort is the District Court Computerisation and networking project which helps streamlining the Judicial administration in the lower courts.
PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES
The main goal of the District Courts Computerisation and Networking Programme is introducing Information Technology Tools in all areas which are routine and time critical in nature, streamlining the District Judicial Administration and bring about transparency of information to the litigants. The following are the objectives of the project :-
Objectives – 1
o Streamlining judicial administration by computer assisted ‘monitoring of case filing’ by the litigants / advocates.
o Keeping track of movement of case files in the Court.
o Providing Computer-based querying facilities to litigants / advocates
Objectives – 2
o Interconnection of all District Courts, the 18 High Courts and the Supreme Court. Providing e-mail facility among all courts and facilitating the day-to-day interaction with the High Court through NICNET.
Objectives – 3
o Giving access to local, National and International legal databases for the District Judges over NICNET and INTERNET.
APPLICATION AREAS
Based on the experience gained by NIC from computerization and networking of the Supreme Court and all the 18 High Courts in the country, the following areas were identified for computerisation in all the 430 District Courts.
1. Case File Monitoring
2. Certified Copies
3. Report Generation
4. Library and Database Resource Sharing
5. E-Mail Facility
6. Personnel Information System
7. Pay Roll and Accounts Processing
CASE FILE MONITORING SYSTEM
The computerisation of District Courts envisages a centralised Filing Counter for streamlining the entire activity of filing process. As soon as a case is filed at the filing counter, the computer decides the posting of the case to a judge based on the existing procedure. It will automatically register the case in the District Court and produce a receipt to the litigant / advocate. At the end of each day the computer will generate a list of cases filed on that day in a format similar to the one maintained in a Register, as is the practice. For avoiding the litigants dealing with a multitude of sections for finding out their case status, a query counter is being opened at the Filing Counter. The preliminary details entered in the computer system will be made available immediately at the computer terminal provided in each court room. The judge can have a list of cases posted by the computer on that date in his court.
The terminal provided in each court room along with a printer will substitute the type-writer. When a case is heard by the judge, the order issued by him will be entered straightway into the computer terminal by the clerk concerned. As the computer system will be storing the orders of the court, any further modification suggested by the judge can easily be carried out in the system within a short time. A copy of the order can also be taken from the printer attached to the computer terminal. The staff of the court will update the database by feeding the operative part of the judgment on the computer system. It will ensure that the matter will come on the board on the date given by the Judge. If a notice is required to be served, the computer system will automatically generate the same and also immediately make it available at the query counter terminal.
CERTIFIED COPIES
As all terminals are connected to the main system in LAN any order/judgment that is typed from any court room, will be automatically available on the LAN. The query terminals at the Filing Counter can be used for generation of print-outs of the orders/judgments as certified copies to the litigants. These computer printed orders of courts are to be signed by an officer before they are issued to parties. In this process there would not be any delay in getting certified copies. This will certainly help in generating the certified copies without delay.
All routine notices, orders etc., can be produced from the computer terminal as the computer system has the formats of various notices and addresses of the parties, it can automatically generate various types of notices.
FAST REPORT GENERATION
The following reports can be generated by the Software
o List of cases filed on a particular date
o List of cases heard/disposed of by a judge on a particular day
o Statistical reports required by the District Court authorities.
BENEFITS
District Court Computerisation and Networking Programme will benefit the management, the judges, the advocates and the litigants alike :
o Monitoring of case flow will be easy
o Litigants, Advocates get case related information at one place
o Posting of cases to various courts will be transparent
o Litigants can get certified copies instantaneously
o Accurate statistical information can be generated
o Cause Lists for each court can be generated automatically
o Caveat Matching will take place at the filing stage itself
o All required notices can be generated automatically
o Preparation of orders/judgments becomes simpler
o Introduction of IT Tools will bring an innovative approach and a better work culture in the District Court.
o National and International legal databases will be readily available to judges, advocates and litigants.
o E-Mail and Internet facilities will be available to every district court.
For further information contact :
Courts Informatics Division
National Informatics Center
A-Block, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
Grams : NICNET HQ
Ph:4364292 Fax :91-11-4362489, 4362628
e-mail :clmr@caselaw.delhi.nic.in
26. ALL INDIA JUDICIAL SERVICE
26.1 Our terms of reference do not require us to indicate the methodology of constituting the All India Judicial Service. It is the responsibility of the Central Government as per decision of the Supreme Court in the All India Judges' Case 1. The Supreme Court observed as follows :
"We are of the view that the Law Commission's recommendation should not have been dropped lightly. There is considerable force and merit in the view expressed by the Law Commission. An All India Judicial Service essentially for manning the higher services in the subordinate judiciary is very much necessary. The reasons advanced by the Law Commission for recommending the setting up of an All India Judicial Service appeal to us.
Since the setting up of such a service might require amendment of the relevant Articles of the Constitution of the Service Rules operating in the different States and Union Territories, we do not intend to give any particular direction on this score particularly when the point was not seriously pressed but we would commend to the Union of India to undertake appropriate exercise quickly so that the feasibility of implementation of the recommendations of the Law Commission may be examined expeditiously and implemented as early as possible. It is in the interest of the health of the judiciary throughout the country that this should be done."
1. AIR 1992 SC 165.
26.2 We have received the status report from the Government of India on the proposal of constituting the All India Judicial Service. The status report dated 10-2-1997 runs as follows :
"The Supreme Court of India in the Writ Petition (Civil) No.1022 of 1989 between All India Judges Association Versus Union of India in its judgment dated 10th April, 1995 has given the direction to Union of India to take immediate measures for the implementation of the direction, to achieve the objective of setting up of All India Judicial Service. Since a Resolution will have to be moved in the Rajya Sabha in this regard, the Government has sought the views of the State Governments / High Courts in the matter.
2. So far we have received comments from 23 States. Comments are still awaited from Governments of Meghalaya and Bihar. The State Governments of Goa, U.P., Mizoram, Punjab, Kerala, Tripura, Sikkim and Orissa agree with the setting up of an All India Judicial Service. The Governments of Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Assam and Rajasthan have given a conditional approval to the proposal. The State Governments of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Karnataka, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur and Andhra Pradesh have not favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service.
3. Of the 18 High Courts, we have received the views - comments of 16 High Courts. Views of the Calcutta High Court and the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir are awaited. The High Courts of Allahabad, Patna, Guwahati and Rajasthan have favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service. The High Courts of Orissa, Sikkim, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala have given their conditional approval to the proposal. The High Courts of Mumbai, Karnataka, Gujarat, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh have no views to offer in this regard in the light of Supreme Court judgment. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab and Madras have not favoured the setting up of an All India Judicial Service.
4. In the light of the recommendation of the Law Commission of India, direction of the Supreme Court and views / comments of the State Governments / High Courts, the question of setting up All India Judicial Service through a resolution of the Rajya Sabha and an enactment of Parliament under article 312 of the Constitution is under consideration."
26.3 The Commission in order to assist the Central Government wanted to ascertain the views of the High Courts and State Governments as to the qualifications and method of recruitment to All India Judicial Service. The Commission circulated the following question :
"Q.No.70 The States Reorganisation Commission has observed that creation of All India Service would be a major compelling necessity for the Nation and it has suggested that a proportion of the Higher Judiciary should be recruited by competitive examination at All India Level so as to attract the best of our young graduates to the Judicial Service. The Law Commission of India has in its 14th Report emphasised the need to establish the All India Judicial Service.
The Supreme Court has unequivocally stated that it is in the interest of the health of the judiciary throughout the country that an All India Judicial Service should be constituted. The Supreme Court has, however, left the matter to the Union of India to undertake quickly appropriate exercise in that regard. Please set out the qualifications and method of recruitment to All India Judicial Service?
26.4 Responses received from the High Courts and State Governments may briefly be summarised as follows :
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :
26.4.1 All India Judicial Services (AIJS) will be composed of Officers selected on All India basis and allotted to State cadre, to remain in that State to ensure the effective control of the High Court in the interest of judicial administration. The initial entry to the AIJS should be to the cadre of Subordinate Judge/Asst. Sessions Judge / Civil Judge (Senior Division). 60% posts in the cadre of Sub-Judges should be allocated directly to the cadre of AIJS. The inservice Judicial Officers may also be permitted to compete for AIJS. There should be a Committee for selection consisting of two Chief Justices of High Courts, one Judge of the Supreme Court, Director of National Judicial Academy and Chairman, UPSC.
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :
26.4.2 Government of Andhra Pradesh is not in favour of constitution of AIJS.
PATNA HIGH COURT :
26.4.3 Qualification for recruitment to AIJS should be law graduate and experience of one year at the Bar.
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AND GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT :
26.4.4 Oppose to setting up of AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR :
26.4.5 No comments.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA :
26.4.6 Not furnished reply.
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA :
26.4.7 Opposes the constitution of AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AND GOVERNMENT OF KERALA :
26.4.8 No comments.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :
26.4.9 Candidates with practice of not less than seven years with the maximum age limit of 40 years should alone be considered for AIJS and 40% of the sanctioned strength is to be filled up by direct recruitment.
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY :
26.4.10 Views on AIJS can be expressed only when the Government of India makes a decision as to how it is going to carry out the exercise of constituting the AIJS.
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA :
26.4.11 Seven years practice as an Advocate should be prescribed for AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA :
26.4.12 The recruitment should be akin to the Indian Civil Service Examination and qualification for recruitment should be LL.B degree.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA :
26.4.13 Not in favour of formation of AIJS, as it will negate the control of the High Court under Article 235 of the Constitution. If created, it may be on par with the Central Services such as IAS, IPS, IFS etc.
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT :
26.4.14 AIJS should consist of promotees to the higher judiciary from the subordinate judiciary of the State only and for direct recruits, 7 years Bar practice should be prescribed with the minimum age of 35 years. Inservice people should be allowed to compete for AIJS.
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS AND GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU :
26.4.15 Not in favour of AIJS.
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT AND GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH :
26.4.16 AIJS can be constituted by absorbing all the existing members of the State Judicial Service on the lines of IFS (Indian Forest Service). Thereafter, recruitment should be made through National Judicial Service Commission. Fresh law graduates should be allowed to compete.
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT :
26.4.17 AIJS has to be constituted in terms of the Constitution and observations of the Supreme Court and the Law Commission. Recruitment must be by the National Judicial Service Commission. The age limit may be 30 to 33 years and qualification for recruitment must be a degree in law.
GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL :
26.4.18 Not in favour of AIJS.
26.5 It will be seen from the above comments and views that some High Courts and State Governments are of the view that the power of control under Article 235 of the Constitution will be belittled if AIJS is constituted. They are perhaps under the impression that AIJS is an independent Service, unconnected with the State Judicial Service.
SERVICE ASSOCIATIONS :
26.6 Invariably, Officers' Associations have opposed the formation of AIJS, perhaps on the ground that their seniority will be affected and their chances of promotion will be diminished.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS :
26.7 In our opinion, it is necessary to allay these apprehensions while constituting AIJS. Bearing that in mind, we indicate herein the broad outlines for consideration of the Central Government for constituting the AIJS :
(i) The AIJS could be constituted only in the cadre of District Judges as per the provisions of Article 312(3) of the Constitution. The District Judges directly recruited and promoted should constitute the AIJS.
(ii) The selection for direct recruitment should be by National Judicial commission / UPSC and promotees by the respective High Courts.
(iii) The qualification for direct recruitment to AIJS should be in conformity with that prescribed under Article 233(2) of the Constitution - i.e., Advocate / Pleader who has got not less than 7 years Bar practice.
(iv) Service Judges also should be allowed to compete for recruitment to AIJS, by appropriately amending Article 233(2) of the Constitution. (See V.II, Chapter 11).
(v) Not exceeding 25% of the posts in the cadre of District Judges in every State should be ear-marked for direct recruitment.
(vi) The age limit for recruitment to AIJS should be between 35 and 45 years.
(vii) The procedure for selection shall be by written examination followed by viva voce.
(See: V. II, Chapter 10).
(viii) Appointment : The National Judicial Commission / UPSC, after selecting the candidates for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judges, must allocate to the States / UTs, the candidates equal to the vacancies that are surrendered by them. The High Court thereupon will recommend those names to the Governor for appointment as per Article 233 of the Constitution.
(ix) Training : The prescribed training is only after appointment.
(x) Seniority : All India Seniority is as per the ranking in the select list..
(xi) Inter-se Seniority in the State / UT : The inter-se seniority between the direct recruits and promotees shall be determined according to the date of allotment and date of promotion.
(xii) Such direct recruits must thus be annexed to the respective State Judicial Service within the three-tier system.
(xiii) Court Language : The recording of the deposition in all Courts should be in two languages - (i) Regional language (to be recorded by the Court Officer); and (ii) English (by the Presiding Officer).
26.8 We are of the opinion that, if the AIJS is constituted in the manner indicated, the apprehension of the High Courts, the Service Judges and the Governments could be minimised, if not totally eliminated.
* * * * *
