Report No. 14

7. Writ Petitions: institutions and disposals.-

The statement below gives the figures of the institution, disposal and pendency of writ applications in the various High Courts during the years 1954-56.

Comparative Statement Showing The Number of Write Petitions (Exclusive Write Appeals) Instituted, Disposed of and Pending in The The Various High Courts For The Year 1954, 1955 and 1956

Name of the State	Pending at the beginning of the year			Instituted			Total for disposal			Disposed of			Pending at the close of the year			Remarks
	1954	1955	1956	1954	1955	1956	1954	1955	1956	1954	1955	1956	1954	1955	1956
1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
Andhra Pradesh	661(A)	808	957	228	792	1177	889	1600	2084	81	643	497	808	957	1637	(A) This figure indicates the pendency as on.-7-1957.
Assam	16	70	31	118	85	121	134	155	152	64	124	72	70	31	80	(D) 711 writ petitions were disposed of by transfer to the Andhra High Court.
Bihar	335	343	373	413	418	616	748	761	989	405	388	468	343	373	521	(E) 125 writ petitions were disposed of by transfer to the Andhra High Court.
Bombay	127	313	285	878	1032	1616	1005	1345	1901	692	1060	1439	313	285	462	(F) 105 writ petitions were received by transfer from PEPSU.
Kerala	142	100	301	219	460	679(G)	361	560	980	261	259	445	100	301	535	(G) 106 writ petitions were disposed of by transfer from Madras.
Madhya Pradesh	177	238	408	534	577	535	711	815	943	473	407	460	238	408	483	(H) 13 writ petitions were disposed of by transfer to Madras.
Madras	1601	616	835	827	1011	1557(M)	2448	1627	2392	1812(D)	792	1392(E)	616	835	1000
Mysore*	72	131	N.A.	173	257	N.A.	245	388	N.A.	114	169	N.A.	131	219	N.A.	(*) The figures shown against the State of Mysore relate to the official years 1954-1955 and 1956.
Orissa	61	367	594	406	400	472	467	767	1066	100	173	582	367	594	484
Punjab	260	307	399	852	740	992(f)	1112	1047	1391	805	648	660	307	399	371	The abbrevaiation "N.A." stands for "not available."
Rajasthan	977	412	301	692	365	471	1669	777	772	1257	476	423	412	301	349
Uttar Pradesh	1474	1561	546	1564	1461	5025	3038	3022	5571	1477	2476	2227	1561	546	3294
West Bengal	353	595	657	701	647	1067	1054	1242	1724	459	585	513	595	657	1211

8. Extent of delays.-

It appears from the figures which we have been able to collect that a number of High Courts have just managed to keep pace with the writ applications which have been filed before them from year to year. But some of them have undoubtedly lagged far behind. It is of the essence of the relief contemplated by Article 226 that it should be very speedily granted. The delays in dealing with these applications not only inconvenience the citizen whose rights are threatened or infringed but they also hamper the State in the discharge of its manifold administrative functions.

We notice that, in some of the High Courts, there were pending on the 1st January, 1957 writ applications filed in the years 1954 and 1955. Some have been pending for an even longer period, though this may be due to special reasons. The statement below shows the years of the institution of writ applications pending in the various High Courts on 1st January, 1957.

Comparative Statement Showing The Pendency of Writ Petitions (Excluding Writ Appeals) in The Various High Courts According To The Year of Institution of The Proceeding as on.-1-1957.

Name of the State	1950	1951	1952	1953	1954	1955	1956	Total	Remarks
1	2	3	435	6	7	8	9	10
Andhra	7	25	14	23	33	541	994	1637
Assam	..	..	..	..	5	31	44	80
Bihar(A)	..	1	10	14	33	150	533	741	(A) the figures shown against the State of Bihar include the miscellaneous judicial cases also.
Bombay(B)	..	3	3	4	65	146	N.A.	221	(B) The figures shown against the State of Bombay indicate the position as on.-1-1956.
Kerala	..	1	3	8	10	79	434	535
Madhya Pradesh	..	..	6	..	12	76	299	393*	(*) It appears that the total pendency was 483.All the pending writ petitions do not seem to have been accounted for on account of reorganisation of Madhya Pradesh High Court.
Madras	..	3	54	4	22	92	825	1000
Mysore	..	..	..	..	7	41	134	182
Orissa	..	..	6	..	98	151	229	484
Punjab (C)	..	..	..	19	43	337	N.A.	399	(C) The figures shown against the State of the Punjab indicate the position as on.-1-1956.
Rajasthan	..	..	2	3	15	53	276	349
Uttar Pradesh	..	1	..	1	28	143	3121	3294
West Bengal	..	..	1	2	11	132	N.A.	146	(D) The figures shown against the State of West Bengal indicate the position as on the Original Side of the High Court. The letters "N.A." Stand for " Not Available.

9. Target time for disposal (Need for close scrutiny).-

We have already indicated elsewhere that, as far as possible, these applications should be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of their institution. We have also dealt elsewhere with measures which can be usefully adopted for scrutinising these applications at the admission stage so that the files of the Courts may not be clogged by applications which prima facie have no merit and which are bound eventually to fail.

10. Hearing by bench or single judge.-

It is necessary to briefly discuss the manner of disposal of applications under Article 226 followed by the different High Courts, in view of the delays which have arisen in their disposal by some of the High Courts. All High Courts examine these applications before admitting them. In some of the courts, this examination is made by a Bench, while in others a single Judge deals with them at the admission stage. The advantage of a Bench dealing with the matter initially is that, if admission is refused, no question arises of a Letters Patent Appeal being filed against the order of refusal.

The practice of admissions being dealt with by a bench is followed on the appellate side in Bombay where we are told that a large number of applications are rejected at this stage after a fairly full hearing of the applicant's counsel. We should have thought that multiplicity of proceedings could be avoided, if initially a bench dealt with the matter. In Madras, however, the practice is different. There, a single judge deals with admissions. Thereafter, if the application is admitted, there is a hearing on the merits also by a single judge. A Letters Patent Appeal lies from the decision of the single judge, but the appeal is not a matter of course.

A Bench of Judges decides whether the appeal should be admitted. If the appeal is admitted, it is eventually heard on the merits by the Bench. At first sight, this procedure seems to be cumbrous and dilatory but the figures made available to us of the number of applications filed, the number admitted and eventually the number in which an appeal is filed and admitted indicate that the Madras method is not unsatisfactory in the results it yields. In Allahabad also, a practice somewhat similar to that in Madras is followed in the matter of dealing with applications under Article 226.

Back

Index

Next