Minutes of the Conference of the Law / Home & Finance Secretaries of the States and Registrar

MINUTES OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE LAW / HOME & FINANCE SECRETARIES OF THE STATES AND REGISTRAR GENERALS OF THE HIGH COURTS HELD ON 5.5.2011 AT VIGYAN BHAWAN, NEW DELHI.

A Conference of the Law / Home and Finance Secretaries and the Registrar Generals of High Courts was held under the chairpersonship of Smt. Neela Gangadharan, Secretary (Justice) on May 5, 2011 at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi.

2. List of participants is enclosed at Annexure II.

3. Joint Secretary (Justice), Shri S.C. Srivastava delivered the welcome address. He outlined the importance of timely action for the achievement of Thirteenth Finance Commission (TFC) award objectives and other on-going schemes like eCourts project, Gram Nyayalayas, Family Courts, etc.

4. Secretary (J), Smt. Neela Gangadharan extended a hearty welcome to all the representatives from the State Governments and the High Courts and thanked them for their full participation. Considering that the Judiciary and the Executive, two important wings of the administration structure of the country have come together and to discuss issues, she expressed hopes that such discussion would result in salutary effect on reduction of pendency of cases in the courts and also on other important initiatives for support to judiciary. In her opening remarks, she mentioned that one of the major problems in justice delivery is the huge amount of pending cases and the reasons are less judge population ratio, less use of technology in the system, age old procedures and infrastructure problems in subordinate judiciary. The cases are higher than the disposal resulting in increase in pendency.

She also mentioned that it is the responsibility of the States to provide infrastructure and the manpower to judiciary while the Government of India have been from time to time assisting the State Governments through Centrally Sponsored Scheme for infrastructure development for the judiciary. She highlighted the point that Vision Statement was adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices and Chief Ministers in 2009 to take into account all these problems and had suggested certain remedial issues. Government of India is in the process of launching National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms which has been approved, in principle, and operational details are worked out. Centre has already increased its financial support to the State Governments in the last 2-3 years. The first of its kind, a huge amount Rs. 5000 crore, has been awarded by the 13th Finance Commission. Rs. 1000 crore have already been released to all States in the first year of the award. The major aim of the 13th Finance Commission grant is improving justice delivery, reducing pendency, strengthening infrastructure and improving human resource development.

The project for ICT enablement of courts wherein 14000 courts in the country to be computerized which means connectivity from the Supreme Court to the Taluka level court. The cost of e-court Project has been revised from nearly Rs.500 crore to Rs. 1000 crore. This year the allocation for infrastructure for judiciary has also gone five fold from Rs.100 crore to Rs.500 crore. For Gram Nyayalayas, allocation has gone up from Rs.40 crore to Rs.150 crore this year. The aim is to see how effectively this money is utilized by the State Governments and the Central Government and judiciary to really improve the system in the respective courts including infrastructure. Close coordination among all stakeholders and timely action is the key to effective utilization of these funds.

She stressed that one year of the TFC grant has passed and now we need to look forward to the specific information from the participants about the status of the progress in their respective States and the High Courts. She made it clear in the meeting that all the State Governments have to provide State Litigation Policy, Utilization Certificates, Perspective Plan, Action Plan for release of funds under 13th Finance Commission. She opened the forum for discussion on the agenda items and hoped that in the presence of both judiciary and the executive some fruitful discussion would take place.

Thirteenth Finance Commission

5. Joint Secretary (Justice) Smt. Snehlata Shrivastava made a power point presentation on TFC which was followed by the inputs from the States / High Court representatives as contained in Annexure I.

6. Some of the major points raised by the States on TFC are listed below:

·  Planned to start special courts and run throughout the day with Retired Judicial Officers and also courts like FTCs can be established and run for five years with the money allocated. Advocates may also be allowed to shift courts/morning/evening courts on payment of honorarium.(Andhra Pradesh)

·  Requested to permit to spend this money for renovation of old buildings instead only heritage court buildings. No land is available for extension of the High Court building and money needs to be spent on land purchase also. Advocates may also be allowed to man shift courts/morning/evening courts on payment of honorarium. (Andhra Pradesh)

·  Construction takes time and there is a problem of escalation of cost as the fund is released in five years. Therefore, for construction activity full amount may be released right in the beginning. (Andhra Pradesh)

·  30 ADR centres can be constructed in 5 years; 6 in each year. Some ADR centre needs less money and some ADR centre needs less. ADR centre may not be necessary in all districts. With some flexibility money can be diverted. (Tamil Nadu)

·  ASI has been requested to declare the High Court building as heritage building. No reply has been received. Therefore, coordination with ASI to be institutionalised.(Assam)

·  Planning to set up ADR centres in 21 districts. This amount may be allowed to be diverted for purchase of land. (Assam)

·  There is one building which is more than 100 years old. We had requested to ASI to declare it as the heritage building. (Tripura)

·  Government proposes to set up Judicial Academy for Mizoram, if possible. (Mizoram)

·  Planned to set up ADR centres. State is preparing final estimates. Additional funds may be provided. (Manipur)

·  Identified 50 acres of land for construction of SJA. Funds for the purpose should be diverted from other components. (Manipur)

·  These are customary courts in Meghalaya and morning/evening courts funds may be permitted to utilise for customary courts under the district council. (Meghalaya)

·  Public Prosecutors have one year term in the State, hence training not found feasible. Request is made to utilize this fund for other components (Meghalaya)

·  Advocates are against the implementation of morning/evening courts. Therefore, proposal to divert the funds for implementation of Gram Nyayalayas or for the setting up of SJA. (West Bengal)

·  Holiday court is being suggested to the HLMC. (Bihar)

·  A little relaxation in the guidelines would go a long way. It may be allowed that High Courts could engage advocates with 10 years experience instead of judicial officers for M/E courts, so that agitating lawyers can be brought into the mainstream. (Assam)

·  Whether the funds for M/E courts can be used for mobile courts? (Haryana)

·  Whether FTC can be funded through TFC grants? (Himachal Pradesh)

·  It was not found suitable to set up M/E courts due to security reasons and it has been decided to start mobile courts instead. (J&K)

·  ASI has not identified buildings as heritage buildings. It is suggested that this should be linked with the age of the building. (J&K)

·  Funds for HCB have been reallocated as no heritage building has been identified by the ASI. Whether funds can be used for renovation of HC Judges bunglow which is a heritage building? For HCB, it should be linked with the age of the building. (Kerala)

·  High Court has decided for evening courts. Government has approved initially 5 centres out of 74 proposed. Evening Court rules have also been framed and referred to the Govt. and after the approval operation of the evening courts could be started. It has been proposed to post one Judicial Officer for one month in shifts on rotation basis. (Kerala)

·  Whether Panch Sadan – official residence of Chief Justice – can be termed as HCB? (Uttarakhand)

·  Formulated Action Plan has been submitted to HLMC. There is a problem of load shedding, electricity is not available. Whether the funds for M/E courts be spent for purchase of DG sets? (Maharashtra)

·  In the process of appointment of Court Managers. We propose that if JOs are holding MBA degree or other equivalent qualification may be allowed to be appointed as CMs. (Maharashtra)

7. On the points raised by the States, the observations and suggestions were given by concerned Government of India officials present in the meeting which are as follows:

Observation of Secretary (Justice), Smt. Neela Gangadharan

·  Money for the M/E courts can be utilized for salary component for operationalizing these courts. It can not be diverted for creation of court infrastructure. State should aim to bring down pendency. Allocation has been done on the basis of existing no. of subordinate courts. The suggestion for further flexibility will be discussed in consultation with Department of Expenditure.

·  Start training for Public prosecutors also.

·  Use the local laws for identifying the heritage buildings.

·  Please bring the objectives into the picture and just not the expenditure. All action plans should necessarily have targets towards achieving disposal of cases.

·  Request the State Finance Departments to cooperate with High Courts in the timely release of money, revalidation etc.

·  HCB – age of the building could be the guideline and this aspect will be considered.

·  Training is a very important component. Detailed guidelines have been prepared by NJA & needs to be followed.

Observation of Joint Secretary (Expenditure), Ms Anjuly Chib Duggal

·  If there are HLMCs constituted for the 12th TFC they may continue but they need to co-opt members from High Court as prescribed in the guidelines.

·  Wherever the matter with ASI is pending, ASI can be summoned by the Chief Secretary for HLMC meeting to resolve the issue in which RG may also be present.

·  Do not keep the funds unutilized, otherwise the funds will lapse at the end of 5 years.

8. Secretary (J) summed up the discussion on TFC grants with following remarks:

-  Reduction of pendency is the main objective and funds need to be utilised to achieve the targets.

-  The release of funds without finalisation of Action Plan in some States sounds to be anomalous as utilisation of funds is to be done in accordance with approved Action Plan.

-  Flexibility in guidelines regarding funding for the ADR centres will be examined by GoI.

-  For identification of Heritage Court Buildings, ASI may also be invited to the HLMC meetings in which RGs may also be present. Age of the building may be taken as criteria, after taking into consideration local laws.

-  The States where pendency of cases is very high, should particularly focus on measures to bring down the pendency through the utilisation of funds under morning/evening courts, lok adalats etc.

-  Training of Public Prosecutors should be given due emphasis.

-  Close coordination amongst all stakeholders and the cooperation of Finance Department is very important for expeditious utilisation of funds. The unutilised funds, if any, in any of the States at the end of 5 year period shall stand lapsed.

-  The duly approved State Litigation Policy, Action Plan and Perspective Plan with appropriate targets & pendency reduction, along with the utilisation certificate in the prescribed format should be sent by all States urgently enabling us to make recommendations to the Ministry of Finance for the release of second annual instalment which cannot be released in absence of these documents.

-  North-Eastern States are requested to send their issues in writing regarding implementation of TFC grants. There will be a separate meeting for N.E. States again in June-July.

-  Court managers appointments should be expedited.

E-Courts Mission Mode Project:

9. This session was also attended by Smt. Deepali Khanna, Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor, Ministry of Law and Justice, Shri Ashok T. Ukrani, Member(Judicial) and Dr. H. K. Suhas, Member(Technical) (both are representatives of Member E-committee of the Supreme Court), and

Shri C.L.M. Reddy, Deputy Director General, NIC.

10. Joint Secretary (Justice) Smt. Snehlata Shrivastava made a power point presentation on eCourt project which was followed by the inputs from the States / High Court representatives on the issues.

11. Initiating the discussion on Mission Mode eCourts project, Secretary (Justice) briefly explained the background that the project was initially approved by CCEA in February, 2007 at a cost of ` 441.8 crore which covered 2100 court complexes and 13,348 courts. Subsequently the scope of the project was expanded and during 2010 the project’s revised cost of ` 935 crore has been approved by CCEA which covers 3069 court complexes and 14,249 courts. To supervise the progress of the project, Judges’ Committees in all High Courts are functional; a District Magistrate has been nominated as Central Project Coordinator who is in regular contact with the implementing agency i.e. NIC. Progress is being monitored through regular meetings in Department of Justice with the representatives of NIC and E-Committee. Also, an Empowered Committee has been constituted which takes decisions on the issues relating to inter-component adjustments and other matters. The project implementation is in advanced stage and hopefully the target of completion of work in 12,000 courts by March, 2012 will be successfully achieved. The bottlenecks are being effectively addressed to. The vendors are being changed whenever considered necessary. The Court Managers, provided under TFC may be made responsible for coordination. Funds for technical manpower and other components in certain cases are being placed directly at the disposal of High Courts.