JUDGMENT

P.P. NAOLEKAR, J.:

1. The Delhi High Court was constituted in 1966. Even after the constitution of the Delhi High Court, the region of Delhi had only one district civil court and one session court. Over the years, with growth in the population of the city, the amount of litigation has seen a constant upward spiral. The very high volume of litigation both on the civil side and on the criminal side has led to a huge backlog of cases and great delays in dispensation of justice, putting the common man and the layman-litigant to great inconvenience.

2. This rather dismal state of affairs in the Delhi courts has not gone unnoticed and at various stages, suggestions and requests have been made to the Union Government for division of the region of Delhi into smaller judicial districts with civil and criminal courts in each district to handle the volume of litigation, to help reduce the backlog of cases and to dispense justice with greater efficacy. The steps taken in this direction will be discussed in greater detail in the latter section of facts.

3. There have been a few petitions on the question of backlog of cases and delay in dispensation of justice. The case filed by the Delhi Judicial Service Association [WP(C) No.741 of 1989], among others, prayed this Court to direct the Delhi Government for creating additional posts in the Delhi Judicial Service. This Court, while passing orders in that matter, directed the Delhi High Court to form a Committee under its aegis, which would look into the feasibility of division of Delhi into smaller judicial districts. On the basis of the report prepared by the Committee, this Court passed an order on 01.05.2000 directing the Delhi Government to take concrete steps towards the creation of judicial districts and further directed the Delhi High Court to appoint two of its Judges to oversee the process of implementation.

4. In pursuance of this order, the Delhi Government, through the Lt. Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, issued a notification in the Official Gazette dated 28.06.2000 under the provisions of Section 19 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918 as extended to the region of Delhi.

5. The instant WP(C) No.437 of 2000 has been filed by the Delhi Bar Association, claiming to be the largest association of its nature in the country, questioning the propriety of such notification and issuance thereof by the Lt. Governor without it being deliberated upon by the Legislative Assembly of Delhi, and thereby questioning the validity of its operation.

6. The facts and the chronology of events leading up to the first WP(C) No. 741 of 1989 (Delhi Judicial Service Association vs. Union of India & Ors.) and the facts leading up to the second Writ Petition in WP(C) No. 437 of 2000 are as follows.

7. WP(C) No.741 of 1989 was filed by the Delhi Judicial Service Association praying the court to issue a mandamus directing the Government to increase the number of available posts in Delhi Higher Judicial Service and Delhi Judicial Service, to streamline the process of filling up of any vacancies in the posts and to conduct the whole process with greater transparency. While hearing the petition, a number of orders were passed by this Court at various instances on matters relating to creation of posts and criterion for promotion.

8. During the pendency of the petitions, there were deliberations at various levels between the Delhi High Court, the Union Government and the Delhi Administration regarding the possibility of division of Delhi into smaller judicial districts and the constitution of courts in these districts. Since there was a connection between the question of division of Delhi into smaller judicial districts and the issues that were being heard in WP(C) No.741 of 1989, the Delhi High Court, which was one of the respondents in the petition, considered it fit to file an additional affidavit on its behalf bringing to light the deliberation on division of Delhi into smaller judicial dis