Monday, January 26, 2015

Re: [IAC#RG] Court pendency behind India's low global ranking:World Bank

Not only in SC, this kind of thing happens in all courts. I have witnessed many such frauds by judges. It is surprising that later many such judges had been promoted or got post retirel positions. In re- video recording of court proceedings are concerned there is an international national commitment from the country and help offered from outside. ADR may have more information About this. Let some body from their side explain it. Purposefully our judiciary and politicians keeps silent about this commitment. If video recording of every proceedings takes place and a mechanism is made in place to deal with erring judicial officers, much problems can easily be solved.

On Jan 26, 2015 3:07 PM, "capt beniwal" <trident142@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Sir, I have been requesting to President and CJI to start live telecast of SC proceedings. when we can see live how a Law is made in parliament, then we want to see how that law is applied.
if a lower court commit an error it can be corrected by higher court but if the SC commit error , deliberately or otherwise, it can not be corrected and the litigant suffer for life. 

i personally saw in SC , when an ex military men pension case was heard, there was No ASG in court during hearing but in SC order, came few days later,  it was stated the ASG made the statement ( thats another point that quoted statement itself is incorrect misleading)  which became the basis of the order and that ex  fauji suffer, beside hundreds of similarly placed men.
ASG got the case settled in chambers.
Had there been recording/live telecast the two ex-judges would have dared to act dishonestly. soon after Both got next better appointments.
 
Today is age of e- governance.  Crores are spend on it.
If there is Rule of Law then Judges can not be allowed to behave like dictators.
To stop that attitude -   Live telecast/recording  is the answer.

rgds. beniwal


On Saturday, 24 January 2015 10:21 PM, Pankaj Rai <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:


 Your Lordship,

As a party in person who has argued a number of cases in High Court, I fail to understand two things. Admittedly, the number of Judges in India is much lower as compared to other countries in the West. However, what are the reasons whereby the Judiciary is reluctant in taking action against a litigant if he files false affidavits and tampered documents even in High Courts? Why don't High Courts start dismissing cases if people make dishonest pleadings and award exemplary costs? Will it not reduce the number of cases significantly if zero tolerance is shown to fraud? Why are orders not passed on applications of perjury?

The second question is whether the existing legal system will inspire confidence unless the Judiciary is made accountable and there is a mandatory recording of court proceedings especially in High Courts/Supreme Courts?

Kind regards,

Pankaj


Maj Pankaj Rai (Retd),


Cell: +91 99163 57115


On Saturday, 24 January 2015 11:59 AM, Dinesh Verma <dcverma06@gmail.com> wrote:


Dear All,
I do not hold brief for Judges nor I wish to defend the incompetent Judges.Exceptions are everywhere.I just wish to bring certain facts,as reported, to the notice of the readers.It may be known to many.
In America on every 10 Lakh citizens 125 Judges are available where as in India on 10 Lakh Citizens only 09 Judges are appointed.This figure shows that 
insufficiency of judges is one of the reason for delay in disposal of cases.
           In 2011 the High Court of Bombay notified to fill 100 vacancies but could fill up only 41.In 2012 out of 159 vacancies only 55 could be filled up.This means even if sanctioned strength is increased ,desired number of quality officers may not be available.Still effort is to be made.
            D.C.Verma
            Former Judge


On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Ravindran P M <raviforjustice@gmail.com> wrote:
Mr Verma,

Any increase in the number of judges without enforcing accountability and transparency will only be wastage of taxpayers' money. The ground reality is that our judiciary is a 10000 pc failure by the basic rule that justice delayed is justice denied. And is justice denied only through delay? Abs NOT! And why the delay and denial of justice? Incompetence, ignorance and arrogance of judges!

Amoung the three organs of our Constitution the law-makers are controlled by the people, bureaucracy (yes, bureaucracy, because without the active support of the bureaucracy no politician can do any wrong!) and finally the judiciary; the law-enforcers are also controlled by the law-makers and the judiciary. And then there are the ears and eyes of the people- the media waiting to sensationalise every news involving the misdemeanour of these authorities. Inspite of such strict supervision and control all that we can hear these days are about politician-bureaucrat-underworld nexus even though the fact remains that none, worth the name, from this unholy nexus have ever been punished by the holier-than-thou judiciary.

So now think how bad a system can be which is not only NOT subject to supervision but also kept beyond critical observation. Well isn’t our judiciary is just that? And do I need to recapitulate that quip: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely?

Please read my blogs:




Lokpal or not- the judiciary needs to be disciplined first at 




ravi

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Dinesh Verma <dcverma06@gmail.com> wrote:
For reform in judicial system Committee after Committee were formed but, except few ,in general, recommendations were not implemented.
It is well known that vacancies, from top court ,ie Supreme Court to lower subordinate courts ,are not filled up.Cases are piling up.
               Sanctioned strength of Judges is proportionately  insufficient for the cases already pending or to meet the new institutions.Even sanctioned strength is not filled up.This also leads to delay in decision.
                Increase in legislation ,increase in population,increase in peoples awareness for their rights,increase in strikes by members of the Bar,increase in seeking adjournments on various avoidable grounds are other reasons for increase in litigation.
                The sanctioned strength of Judges at all the levels is desired to be increased by four times with simultaneous increase in infrastructure.
                It is for the authorities & for policy makers to consider and take an early action.
D.C.Verma
Former Judge
                

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Dipak Shah <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
I can give you as many as more than 20 of my cases. How they are rattled by Justices . Are they taking oath for such doing business. Without having filed Affidavit in reply by Respondents , having served the notice, dismissed the cases taking own intuition of the subject matter.!!!!!
Relevance of the cases not related to the case under study!!!!
Recently Gujarat High Court has made a rule that Party In Person cannot appear in his case unless Special Committee takes interview and passes him to appear and competent to appear in the case. Otherwise he has to engage Advocate in his case. This is against fundamental rights of a person under Constitution.
I had seen one Advocate of one Justice loitering in the courts to canvass for doing favorable judgment !!!!
In one case Justice G T  Nanavati and other Justice made order immediately after abolition of Controller of Capital Issues office by Manmoihan Singh in Fianance Bill. in 1992. C C I Office was afraud and cash counter to Grant hefty premiums over the share public issue.
Since the office is abolished the petition is dismissed. No Affidavit filed by Controller of Capital Issues!!! How the flow of water gate flows!!!! To fight with this I had to appeal to Supreme Court of India by spending lacs of rupees!!!!
One case may be seen , very minutely. Attached Document, See also relevance of the names and Google Search all and every thing.
How the Cases are being handled. There is no supervisor !! Appeal and Appeal and Appeal till you die.
Shah D J



On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 8:25 AM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:


I can give you as many as more than 20 of my cases. How they are rattled by Justices . Are they taking oath for such doing business. Without having filed Affidavit in reply by Respondents , having served the notice, dismissed the cases taking own intuition of the subject matter.!!!!!
Relevance of the cases not related to the case under study!!!!
Recently Gujarat High Court has made a rule that Party In Person cannot appear in his case unless Special Committee takes interview and passes him to appear and competent to appear in the case. Otherwise he has to engage Advocate in his case. This is against fundamental rights of a person under Constitution.
I had seen one Advocate of one Justice loitering in the courts to canvass for doing favorable judgment !!!!
In one case Justice G T  Nanavati and other Justice made order immediately after abolition of Controller of Capital Issues office by Manmoihan Singh in Fianance Bill. in 1992. C C I Office was afraud and cash counter to Grant hefty premiums over the share public issue.
Since the office is abolished the petition is dismissed. No Affidavit filed by Controller of Capital Issues!!! How the flow of water gate flows!!!! To fight with this I had to appeal to Supreme Court of India by spending lacs of rupees!!!!
One case may be seen , very minutely. Attached Documents, See also relevance of the names and Google Search all and every thing.
How the Cases are being handled. There is no supervisor !! Appeal and Appeal and Appeal till you die.
Shah D J


On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 1:07 AM, Manohar Sharma <mspropertyresource@gmail.com> wrote:


I and in my circle has EXPERIENCED how petitions r NEGLECTED and time PASSED to get DEATH of CAUSE of PETITIONS 4 example one see WP @ M-HC/8508/2003.  

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:46 AM, sonico sharma sharma <sharmakrishna27@hotmail.com> wrote:
Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (sharmakrishna27@hotmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

sir,
justice delayed is justice denied

Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:51:50 +0530
From: janhitmanch@gmail.com
To:
Subject: [IAC#RG] Court pendency behind India's low global ranking: World Bank



Date : 17-01-2015

SPEED POST

BHAGVANJI RAIYANI

I AM ASHAMED OF OUR JUDICIARY
I AM ASHAMED OF OUR GOVERNMENT
I AM ASHAMED OF OUR PARLIAMENT

To,
1. Hon'ble Shri Pranab Mukherjee
The President of India,
2. Dr.Hamid Ansari
Hon'ble Vice President of India,
3. Mrs.Sumitra Mahajan
Hon'ble Speaker, Loksabha
4. Hon'ble Shri Narendra Modi,
The Prime Minister of India
5. Hon'ble Justice H.L.Dattu
The Chief Justice of India
6. Hon'ble Smt.Sushma Swaraj
Minister for External Affair
7. Hon'ble Shri D.V.Sadananda Gowda
Minister for Law & Justice

Please read The Times of India report dated 17-1-2015 as hereunder, captioned 'Court pendency behind India's low global ranking: World Bank finding: 'Ease of Doing Business'. India was ranked 142 among 189 countries last year. The World Bank suggested that there was an urgent need for reforms in the system of performance appraisal of judicial reforms.

We go on urging for your appointments to discuss judicial reforms but you never care to reply. Now we will be more aggressive (Gandhian ways) an pursuing the mission justice. We will take the issue before the UN and the comity of nations.

I dare you all to sue me if you feel I have defamed institutions or the dignitaries.

(Bhagvanji Raiyani)
Chairman & Managing Trustee
Forum For Fast Justice
09820403912
Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 056.
The Times of India report:
Court pendency behind India's low global ranking: World Bank.

NEW DELHI: Large pendency of cases in Indian courts and non-implementation of judicial reforms have been cited by the World Bank as one of the key reasons for India's low rank on the Bank's Index of 'Ease of Doing Business'. India was ranked 142 among 189 countries last year.

In a memorandum to the department of industrial policy and promotion (DIPP) under the commerce ministry, the World Bank suggested linking judges' appraisal with reduction of pendency in courts. Sources said the matter was discussed at a meeting organized by the DIPP recently to refine the performance evaluation system of judges to link their performance to the resolution of specific bottlenecks as suggested by the World Bank.

The DIPP is also coordinating implementation of the 'Make in India' campaign of the Modi government.

Interestingly, the World Bank suggested that there was an urgent need for reforms in the system of performance appraisal of judicial officers in the country to bring about uniformity and infuse objectivity and standardization.

The Bank cited an example from Malaysia where implementation of a reform index for judges improved case disposal rates and reduced backlog by 50% in less than three years. Another example was cited from the United Arab Emirates, where rewards were instituted for the best performers.

According to the memorandum, the liberal grant of adjournments was an often cited reason for delays in court proceedings in India. It recommended monitoring the number of times judges granted adjournments and the reasons for granting them. "This can be done through case management systems and linked to performance management evaluations," it said.

It asked the government to ensure that adjournments were not indefinite by setting a time limit.

Just a few weeks ago, the Modi government had written to chief justices of all 24 high courts to ensure speedier settlement of commercial and other disputes for creating a conducive investment climate and success of 'Make in India' campaign.

"One of the reforms introduced by Malaysia between 2009 and 2011 during the overhaul of the judicial system was the implementation of a reform index for judges," the Bank said, citing how this index, fixed by the judges themselves, was aimed at allowing them to assess and monitor their performance. As a result of this and other measures, case disposal rates in Malaysian courts improved and backlog was reduced by 50% in less than three years, it said. 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in




Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in


Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in


Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in





Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)