LOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S. N. SHUKLA IAS (RETD. ) vs UNION OF INDIA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(SC) 222

S. A. BOBDE, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SURYA KANT
LOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S. N. SHUKLA IAS (RETD. ) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Petitioner-in-person
For the Respondent(s):K.K. Venugopal, Ld. AG R.S. Suri, Ld. ASG B.K. Satija, Rajat Nair, Neela Kedar Gokhle, Gurmeet Singh Makkar, Atmaram NS Nadkarni, Sr. Adv. D.L. Chidananda, Salvador Santosh Rebello, Alok Kumar Pandey, Ashwin Kumar D.S, Preetika Dwivedi, Divyakant Lahoti, Parikshit Ahuja, Praveena Bisht, Madhur Jhavar, Vindhya Mehra, Kartik Lahoti, Shivangi Malhotra, Jaigopal Saboo, Romy Chacko, Shakthi Chand Jaidwal, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Gaurav Pachnanda, Sr. Adv. Sahil Tagotra, Avni Sharma, V. N. Raghupathy, Md. Apzal Ansari, Sharan Thakur, Mahesh Thakur, Siddhartha Thakur, Vipasha Singh, Ravindra Shrivastava, Sr. Adv. Arjun Garg, Shrutika Garg, Arjun Garg, Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Sibo Sankar Mishra, Ashok Kumar Singh, Umakant Mishra, Rajiv Sinha, Kunal Chatterji, Maitrayee Banerjee, Pravar Veer Misra, Harpreet Singh Gupta, Sahil Raveen Gopal Singh, Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv. Mukul Kumar, SS Nagananda, Sr. Adv. Arjun Rao, Maitreyi Bhat, / Lyssa Brito, Mayank Pandey, Uttara Babbar, Manan Bansal, Shweta Mohta, Apoorv Kurup, Abhimanyu Tewari, P.I. Jose, Prashant K. Sharma, Radhika Gautam, Ashwarya Sinha, R. Basant, Sr. Adv. T.G. Narayanan Nair, Manu Krishnan, M/s KSN & Co., Soumya Chakraborty, Sr. Adv. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Shashi Pathak, Aruna Mathur, Avneesh Arputham, For M/s Arputham Aruna And Co, Vinay Arora, Naresh K. Sharma, Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Gurmeet Singh Makker, D.L. Chidananda, Preetika Dwivedi, Divyakant Lahoti, Kunal Chatterji, Romy Chacko, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Sahil Tagotra, V. N. Raghupathy, Arjun Garg, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Gopal Singh, Mukul Kumar, Uttara Babbar, Apoorv Kurup, P.I. Jose, Radhika Gautam, Ashwarya Sinha, T.G. Narayanan Nair, M/S. KSN & Co., Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Mahesh Thakur, Abhimanyu Tewari, M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, Vinay Arora, Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

1. The intent of our order today is to activate a dormant provision of the Constitution of India - Article 224A - for the appointment of ad hoc Judges to deal with the unprecedented situation arising from the backlog of cases pending in the High Courts, which has now crossed the figure of 57 lakh coupled with the consistent ratio of vacancies of almost 40 per cent. Any Constitution has to be dynamic, and thus, even if the intent behind including the provision (as it appears from the Constituent Assembly Debates) was slightly different, nothing prevents it from being utilised to subserve an endeavour to solve an existing problem. For as it is always said, ‘change is the only constant’.

2. India was fortunate to have some of the best minds work on the framing of our Constitution as members of our Constituent Assembly. The Indian Constitution is an elaborate one, taking cues from the experience of various democracies. One of the essential aspects of our Constitution has been the separation of powers between the Judiciary, Executive, and Legislature.

3. Chapter V of Part VI

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(SC) 222

S. A. BOBDE, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SURYA KANTLOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S. N. SHUKLA IAS (RETD. ) – AppellantVersusUNION OF INDIA – Respondent

Cases Referred (13)

S. A. BOBDE, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SURYA KANT
LOK PRAHARI THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S. N. SHUKLA IAS (RETD. ) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent