Will increasing the strength of the SC solve the pendency problem?
The article discusses the implications of increasing the Supreme Court's sanctioned strength in India. It argues that the current system allows for an overwhelming number of Special Leave Petitions, contributing to judicial backlog. The piece emphasizes the need for clearer guidelines and the potential for conflicting rulings if the court's strength is increased without addressing these underlying issues.
- ▪The government could have introduced the proposal to increase the Supreme Court's strength through the ordinary legislative process instead of using an ordinance.
- ▪The Supreme Court's docket is increasingly dominated by Special Leave Petitions, which were intended to be used sparingly.
- ▪There is a lack of clear guidelines governing the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136, leading to unpredictability and allegations of corruption.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Was the ordinance route necessary to increase the top court’s sanctioned strength?Prashant Reddy: No. With Parliament set to convene within weeks, the government could easily have introduced the proposal through the ordinary legislative process. In any event, previous Bills increasing the sanctioned strength of the top court have often passed with minimal debate. In fact, in 2009, the government reportedly introduced a similar measure through a money Bill owing to its numerical disadvantage in the Rajya Sabha. Resorting to an ordinance for a measure of this nature deepens institutional scepticism and fuels unnecessary speculation about the motives of the move.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Hindu — Top.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Hindu — Top
