The Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said, on Friday, that the Central government has no plans to increase the retirement age of Supreme Court and High Court judges..The minister further said that age of retirement of judges and vacancies in judiciary is not the reason for pendency of cases. "We are not increasing the tenure of the judges. We think retirement age of 65 (years) for Supreme Court and 62 (years) for High Court is ok. If decision needs to be taken, that can happen, when it happens, but right now, there is no plan as such," the minister stated.He was speaking at India Today conclave in Mumbai. The minister said that there is a misconception that due to large number of vacancies in the judiciary, the pendency of cases is high. "The larger question is - disposal of cases. That has nothing to do with age or vacancy and all. People have this misconception, that due to large vacancies, there is pendency of cases. This is actually not true. As I said, I do not want to be very academic, and start explaining all the reasons. It will be a little boring," he stated..In this regard, he stated how undeserving cases also go right up to the Supreme Court adding to the burden of the judiciary."If you look at the numbers of cases, more than half of the cases do not deserve to be listed actually. You tell me why should Supreme Court involve themselves in bail petitions? Every bail is going to Supreme Court. Is the Supreme Court of India made to hear bail petitions? Bail petitions are to be dealt by the lower courts. Limited cases should come to High Court, forget the Supreme Court. Why should Supreme Court deal with bail petitions, unless it is death penalty or some serious cases," Rijiju said..He indicated that the government was looking at evolving mechanisms to ensure that legal disputes do not necessarily reach courts but are settled between parties via mediation etc. "Many cases can be dealt at the local community level. Now if you look at the Mediation Bill that I have tabled, I am very hopeful, that in the coming winter session (of the parliament) we should be able to pass the Mediation Bill. I am telling you on this platform, large numbers of cases can be handled through mediation. ...Other business, contractual cases should go to arbitration. Only limited cases should come to court," the Law Minister opined. .The minister also candidly stated that even with regular appointments happening, there would always be 20 percent vacancy in the judiciary."At no given time, the pendency can go below 200. Because process is such that vacancy will remain. Because the Collegium system and the manner in which it is dealt with it will definitely leave some 20% vacancy at all times", Rijiju said.
The Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said, on Friday, that the Central government has no plans to increase the retirement age of Supreme Court and High Court judges..The minister further said that age of retirement of judges and vacancies in judiciary is not the reason for pendency of cases. "We are not increasing the tenure of the judges. We think retirement age of 65 (years) for Supreme Court and 62 (years) for High Court is ok. If decision needs to be taken, that can happen, when it happens, but right now, there is no plan as such," the minister stated.He was speaking at India Today conclave in Mumbai. The minister said that there is a misconception that due to large number of vacancies in the judiciary, the pendency of cases is high. "The larger question is - disposal of cases. That has nothing to do with age or vacancy and all. People have this misconception, that due to large vacancies, there is pendency of cases. This is actually not true. As I said, I do not want to be very academic, and start explaining all the reasons. It will be a little boring," he stated..In this regard, he stated how undeserving cases also go right up to the Supreme Court adding to the burden of the judiciary."If you look at the numbers of cases, more than half of the cases do not deserve to be listed actually. You tell me why should Supreme Court involve themselves in bail petitions? Every bail is going to Supreme Court. Is the Supreme Court of India made to hear bail petitions? Bail petitions are to be dealt by the lower courts. Limited cases should come to High Court, forget the Supreme Court. Why should Supreme Court deal with bail petitions, unless it is death penalty or some serious cases," Rijiju said..He indicated that the government was looking at evolving mechanisms to ensure that legal disputes do not necessarily reach courts but are settled between parties via mediation etc. "Many cases can be dealt at the local community level. Now if you look at the Mediation Bill that I have tabled, I am very hopeful, that in the coming winter session (of the parliament) we should be able to pass the Mediation Bill. I am telling you on this platform, large numbers of cases can be handled through mediation. ...Other business, contractual cases should go to arbitration. Only limited cases should come to court," the Law Minister opined. .The minister also candidly stated that even with regular appointments happening, there would always be 20 percent vacancy in the judiciary."At no given time, the pendency can go below 200. Because process is such that vacancy will remain. Because the Collegium system and the manner in which it is dealt with it will definitely leave some 20% vacancy at all times", Rijiju said.
