Lok Sabha Question No. 3990 (UNSTARRED), answered on 2023-03-24
Subject: Strength of Judges
Ministry: LAW AND JUSTICE
Asked by: Nalin Kumar Kateel, Kaushalendra Kumar, Dinesh Chandra Yadav, Rajiv Ranjan (Lalan) Singh, Sumalatha Ambareesh, D.K. Suresh

## GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

## LOK SABHA

## UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 3990

## TO BE ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 24.03.2023

## Strength of Judges

## 3990. SHRI NALIN KUMAR KATEEL:

SHRI KAUSHALENDRA KUMAR:

SHRI DINESH CHANDRA YADAV:

SHRI RAJIV RANJAN SINGH ALIASLALAN SINGH:

SHRIMATI SUMALATHA AMBAREESH:

SHRI D.K. SURESH:

Will the Minister of LAW AND JUSTICE be pleased to state:

- (a) whether  around  forty  percent  of  posts  of  judges  in  Supreme  Court  (SC)  and  High Courts  are  lying  vacant  and  if  so,  the  details  thereof  and  the  reasons  therefor indicating the sanctioned strength and vacancies, Court-wise;
- (b) whether  the  disagreement  between  the  Government  and  the  Supreme  Court  has aggravated the situation of increasing vacancies in the courts, if so, the steps taken to resolve this issue;
- (c) whether  the  shortage  of  judges  has  resulted  in  further  increase  in  the  pendency  of cases in the said courts and if so, the details thereof;
- (d) whether the Government is taking any concrete decision/measures on this issue; and
- (e) if so, the details thereof?

## ANSWER

## MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE

## (SHRI KIREN RIJIJU)

(a) to (e): As on 21.03.2023, there is no vacancy of Judges in the Supreme Court. As far as the High Courts are concerned, against the sanctioned strength of 1114 Judges, 785 Judges are working and 329 posts of Judges are vacant. Against these 329 vacancies, 119 proposals

recommended by High Court Collegiums are at various stages of processing between the Government  and  the  Supreme  Court  Collegium  and  recommendations  against  remaining 210 vacancies are yet to be received from the High Court Collegiums. TheHigh Court-wise detail  of  sanctioned  strength,  working  strength  and  vacancy  as  on  21.03.2023  is  at Annexure.

Appointment of Judges in higher judiciary is a collaborative and integrated process involving the executive and the judiciary. It requires consultation and approval from various constitutional  authorities.  Differences  of  opinion,  if  any,  are  mutually  reconciled  by  the executive and the judiciary to ensure that only the apposite person is appointed to the high constitutional post of a Judge.

While every effort is made to fill up the existing vacancies expeditiously, vacancies of  Judges  in  High  Courts  do  keep  on  arising  on  account  of  retirement,  resignation  or elevation  of  Judges  and  also  due  to  increase  in  the  strength  of  Judges . Government  is committed to filling up of vacancy expeditiously in time-bound manner.

During  the  period  from  May,  2014  to  2023  (till  21.03.2023),  54  Judges  were appointed in Supreme Court of India, 893 fresh Judges were appointed in the various High Courts and 646 Additional Judges were appointed as Permanent Judges of High Courts.

The detailed statement of Pendency of Cases in Supreme Court and High Court for the past three years, showing the increase/decrease of pendency of cases in the respective courts is as below:

| Year           | 2020      | 2021      | 2022      |
|----------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| Supreme Court* | 64,429    | 96,855    | 69,598    |
| High Courts**  | 56,42,567 | 56,49,068 | 59,78,714 |

The pendency of cases in courts is not only due to shortage of judges in High Courts but  also  due  to  various  other  factors  like  (i)  increase  in  number  of  state  and  central legislations, (ii) accumulation of first appeals, (iii) continuation of ordinary civil jurisdiction in  some of the High Courts, (iv) appeals against orders of quasi-judicial forums going to High Courts, (v) number of revisions/appeals, (vi) frequent adjournments, (vii) indiscriminate  use  of  writ  jurisdiction,  (viii)  lack  of  adequate  arrangement  to  monitor, tracking and bunching of cases for hearing, (ix) assigning work of administrative nature to the Judges, etc.

*****

## ANNEXURE

Statement showing Sanctioned strength, Working Strength and Vacancies of Judges in the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts (As on 21.03.2023)

Sanctioned strength

Working strength

Vacancies

| A.   | Supreme Court    | 34   | 34   | 34    | 34   | 34   | 34    | 0    | 0    | 0     |
|------|------------------|------|------|-------|------|------|-------|------|------|-------|
| B.   | High Court       | Pmt. | Addl | Total | Pmt. | Addl | Total | Pmt. | Addl | Total |
| 1    | Allahabad        | 119  | 41   | 160   | 82   | 21   | 103   | 37   | 20   | 57    |
| 2    | Andhra Pradesh   | 28   | 9    | 37    | 26   | 5    | 31    | 2    | 4    | 6     |
| 3    | Bombay           | 71   | 23   | 94    | 42   | 23   | 65    | 29   | 0    | 29    |
| 4    | Calcutta         | 54   | 18   | 72    | 34   | 19   | 53    | 20   | -1   | 19    |
| 5    | Chhattisgarh     | 17   | 5    | 22    | 9    | 4    | 13    | 8    | 1    | 9     |
| 6    | Delhi            | 46   | 14   | 60    | 45   | 0    | 45    | 1    | 14   | 15    |
| 7    | Gauhati          | 22   | 8    | 30    | 14   | 9    | 23    | 8    | -1   | 7     |
| 8    | Gujarat          | 39   | 13   | 52    | 29   | 0    | 29    | 10   | 13   | 23    |
| 9    | Himachal Pradesh | 13   | 4    | 17    | 9    | 0    | 9     | 4    | 4    | 8     |
| 10   | J &Kand Ladakh   | 13   | 4    | 17    | 11   | 4    | 15    | 2    | 0    | 2     |
| 11   | Jharkhand        | 20   | 5    | 25    | 20   | 1    | 21    | 0    | 4    | 4     |
| 12   | Karnataka        | 47   | 15   | 62    | 40   | 13   | 53    | 7    | 2    | 9     |
| 13   | Kerala           | 35   | 12   | 47    | 31   | 6    | 37    | 4    | 6    | 10    |
| 14   | Madhya Pradesh   | 39   | 14   | 53    | 31   | 0    | 31    | 8    | 14   | 22    |
| 15   | Madras           | 56   | 19   | 75    | 47   | 11   | 58    | 9    | 8    | 17    |
| 16   | Manipur          | 4    | 1    | 5     | 3    | 0    | 3     | 1    | 1    | 2     |
| 17   | Meghalaya        | 3    | 1    | 4     | 3    | 0    | 3     | 0    | 1    | 1     |
| 18   | Orissa           | 24   | 9    | 33    | 21   | 0    | 21    | 3    | 9    | 12    |
| 19   | Patna            | 40   | 13   | 53    | 32   | 0    | 32    | 8    | 13   | 21    |
| 20   | Punjab& Haryana  | 64   | 21   | 85    | 38   | 27   | 65    | 26   | -6   | 20    |
| 21   | Rajasthan        | 38   | 12   | 50    | 33   | 0    | 33    | 5    | 12   | 17    |
| 22   | Sikkim           | 3    | 0    | 3     | 3    | 0    | 3     | 0    | 0    | 0     |
| 23   | Telangana        | 32   | 10   | 42    | 30   | 2    | 32    | 2    | 8    | 10    |
| 24   | Tripura          | 4    | 1    | 5     | 2    | 0    | 2     | 2    | 1    | 3     |
| 25   | Uttarakhand      | 9    | 2    | 11    | 5    | 0    | 5     | 4    | 2    | 6     |
|      | Total            | 840  | 274  | 1114  | 640  | 145  | 785   | 200  | 129  | 329   |