 |
|
Make judges accountable
for delays The editorial “Erosion of faith: Speed up the justice” (Sept 26) rightly endorsed the Supreme Court’s views on the delays of cases by the judiciary. A few judges feel comfortable in giving adjournments resulting in untold hardship to litigants. Why cannot chief justices of high courts monitor such delays and make the judges accountable for delays? What is the justification of the date when the old suits to be taken on a date are fixed months in advance with concurrence of both parties and then again the date is confirmed a day before hearing on the website? The civil suits reach high courts in appeals after adjudication from the lower courts with compiled record. Then, why can the verdict not be given on the first hearing? If the property suits linger for 60 years for a decision, as sadly observed by the Supreme Court (Sept 25), then in the life expectancy of 65 years, is it possible for the senior citizens to see justice in their lifetime?
|
|
|
It is both the lack of adequate number of judges and the individual’s failure that is the cause for tardy justice. There should be a time limit for the delivery of justice and adjournments should also be covered by the Limitation Act. G. L. SACHDEVA, Panchkula II In the absence of a time-bound justice delivery system, the aggrieved litigants are forced to take recourse to extra judicial means and other remedies. The Centre has amended the procedural statutes but this is not enough. The Supreme Court, in Salem Advocates Association vs Union of India (Aug 2005), had devised a case flow management formula categorising all cases into four tracks depending upon their nature and quantum of punishment and the maximum timeframe for disposal of each track of cases. The High Courts were told to make amendments in their rules to implement the directions. But the backlog of cases continues. There is a need to popularise the alternative dispute resolution
(ADR) system. It should be made less cumbersome and technical. To streamline the judiciary, the Supreme Court should declare a national judicial emergency on the lines of the Centre’s power to declare national emergency. HEMANT KUMAR
Ambala City
Haryana vs Punjab Haryana has edged past Punjab in most parameters of economic development. Punjab, once known as the country’s most prosperous state because of the highest per capita income, has lost to Haryana in the race. Haryana’s per capita income in 2006-07 was Rs 44.151 as against Punjab’s Rs 35.161. This downward trend started in 2003-04 when for the first time Haryana with a per capita income of Rs 31.509 left Punjab behind as Punjab’s per capita income stood at Rs 31.192. Haryana witnessed a growth of 12.6 per cent in Gross State Domestic Product in 2005-06 while its economy saw a growth of 4.65 in
GSDP. At present, Punjab is considered the slowest growing state; perhaps it is only better than Daman and Diu. Mr Badal and Co. should do serious introspection and do the needful. Dr NARESH
RAJ, Patiala
CBI’s ways The
editorial, “Shocking:
CBI’s clean chit to Tytler questionable” (Oct 6) is apt
and timely. In spite of the Delhi court verdict, the CBI preferred to
close the 1984 riot case against former Union Minister Jagdish Tytler,
after 23 years. The editorial rightly summed up the CBI’s
functioning in this and other cases especially concerning politicians.
The fact that it is “turning like a weather cock depending on which
way the wind is blowing” is sad. M. P. S. RANDHAWA, Dhapai (Kapurthala)
|
||
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
