A Fundamental research on the Supreme court of India on the aspects of the social science point of view to justify the need for an additional bench with respect to the increasing population by it’s political, geographical constrains of the common men on the economical aspects. In order to reduce the burden of courts, Government of India The established the Tribunals by several acts, where the administrative tribunals not binding to the Code of Civil procedures put a test on the common man by process of law.

The High Court has given thousands and thousands of judgments, quashed, set aside the order of these Tribunals and secured the common men from the abuse the process of law. The right of common men to file writs before the Supreme Court under article 32, where these matters can be addressed to Supreme Court of India. However, it is not feasible to file a petition by any common men, and those touched with socio economic point to express the need of additional bench in the Indian Continent, less bias statement but to catch hold the people point, to addresses who can sort this matter, when this research succeeded for thesis for Ph.D, studies.

Observing the Issues:
1.38 billion Population to Appeal 1 Supreme Court.

High Population in Cities, States and /or Countries are one of the major social issue where the disputes arises between the people are high, common and unavoidable. The pending cases in India, keeping increasing day by day and all the courts are over loaded and occupied, for over 2 decades.

In order to reduce the burden of High Courts in different states, Government of India has introduced established Tribunal systems through several acts and has established DRT/DRAT, NCLT, NCLAT, National Green Tribunals to extend the reach of law.

Issue Identified in Tribunals:

In order to reduce the burden on the courts, the quasi judicial organizations such as Tribunals were established by the Government of India, but establishments has not bound to follow the code of procedures such as CPC and Cr.PC; whereas these Tribunals acts without any supervision in their specified law; resulted non interference by High Courts and became autonomous and threat to Common public.

DRT / DRAT, NCLT, NCLAT has not following the code of procedures and there were hundreds of judgments released by High Courts that these Tribunals acted against the principle of Natural Justice but these tribunals has continuously evading the clutches of superior court and being profit making center for Banks, Public sector companies, whereas these proceeding officers deciding the cases, none of them has not been appointed by the Apex Courts. It is such painful that some of proceeding officers being appointed by Government of India without any Law background, to head judicial function and decide the case.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/coimbatore/Over-150-advocates-abstain-from-Tribunal/articleshow/15367896.cms
Referring to the aforesaid news, One of the bank’s general manager has been appointed in DRT, Coimbatore District & advocates protested against the immoral appointment of such in Judicial area, things brought back to systems after boycott and brought this to media, and there were unique rules created to regulate the procedures of such tribunals.

These Tribunals has played a vital role in resolving the disputes with unique procedures on their own and discharged the cases on fast track but most of the decisions typically challenged in Apex Courts. Those case were reviewed in the High Court’s under Article 226 of Constitution of India and the Apex courts has issued set aside the order, quashed the order given by Tribunals after a careful assessment that the Tribunals has overlooked the principle of natural justice, equity and directed/ tuned the tribunals to establishing a proper system and the Apex court found that these Tribunals acted against the principle of natural justice and bias to the Government agencies such as banks, commercial companies in faster recovery of debts.

More ever, Apex courts intervention made adverse results in last decade and Government has established several bills, acts, rules, policies for reducing the intervention of High Court and those let the Tribunals free from the clutches of Apex Court.

There, where one has to pay for his debts (even the debt heavily boosted by authorities), or can be preyed by the authorities/Tribunals, and none can file for specific relief against Tribunals if though, it will not be maintainable by law.

Other petitions to Supreme Courts:
The superior court of India has not only the appeal petitions from the Tribunals, but also the look after the appeals from the high courts, and also receiving the millions of petitions filed by the citizens under the article 32 of Constitution of India and discharge all cases at the earliest. The backlog cases of cases has related the acceptance of the petition by the registrar where none could be blamed for any rejection since such rejection is related to the population who can be served, deserved by the priority, integrity and also the impact on the society.

The only Choice for the alleged person, now approaching the Supreme Court of India BUT, question of facts:

1. Whether One and Only Supreme Court of India is reachable for these common men and women of 1.3 Million population?
2. Whether is feasible to file such Appeals in Courts, which when, those being refused in High Courts
3. Would it be affordable for any men or women across the country to file, especially for the major population under the below poverty line?

The Lecture Reviews: Population & Court Establishments

1. Highly Occupied Courts
   There are 544 district courts, 25 High courts with 1 Supreme Court in the country, where these courts has to deal the cases across the countries with a population of 1.3 billion.

The ratio of occupancy with refer to Total population as below:

1 Supreme Court : 130,00,00,000
25 High Courts: 5,20,00,000 each
544 District and subordinate courts (Total of 16,845): 23,89,700 each

Referring to Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, in 2019 there were pending cases sited https://thewire.in/law/pending-court-cases:

• Pending cases in Supreme Court were 59,867 cases
• Pending cases in High Courts were 44, 75, 000 cases
• Pending cases in District and Subordinate courts were 3, 14, 00,000 cases

The Supreme Court of India has totally out of reach for any Indian, where extremely costly for common men and women across the country, especially for the people of southern states, like Tamilnadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Andrapradesh, Telungana and other UTs. Otherwise, the supremacy will not be reachable to all the branches of all states.

It is possible for anyone to file a Writ Petition before Supreme Court of India, pleading the need of Supreme Court benches in Chennai or Bangalore, under article 14?
Yes, it is.

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution reads as follows: "Equality before Law – The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India." The words "equal protection of laws" indicates two things: Firstly that every person is entitled to protection of all the laws of the land, and secondly, every person within Indian territory is equally entitled to that protection.

It may be interpreted by some of the jurists that the all courts can be affordable to all citizens, especially constitution allowed the common men to reach the supreme court under article 32.

Question of Law:
When Madras High Court has Madurai bench to manage the population of Tamilnadu state, Supreme Court may provisions to establish their additional bench in India to manage the 1.38 billion population; any citizen who’s going to such credit to file petition may be supported by billions directly and indirectly.

1. Some Legislators take initiatives?
2. Suo moto case taken by court itself? Or,
3. Some citizen of India who stand for society file writ before Supreme Court?

Brain Storming in Examine the Reliability of Tribunal Judiciary:

Data source taken from UID, base on May 31. 2020 for Research Studies
 

	Name Of State	High Court	Population
1	Andhra Pradesh	High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati	49400000
2	Arunachal Pradesh	Gauhati High Court, Itannagar	1712000
3	Assam	Gauhati High Court, Itannagar	36024656
4	Bihar	Patna High Court, Patna	128458570
5	Chhattisgarh	High Court of Chhattisgarh, Raipur	29000000
6	Goa	High Court of Bombay, at Goa	1500000
7	Gujarat	High Court of Gujarat	67100000
8	Haryana	High Court of Chandigarh	28,875,087
9	Himachal Pradesh	High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla	7500000
10	Jharkhand	High Court of Jharkhand	31500000
11	Karnataka	High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru	69,586,993
12	Kerala	Kerala High Court	34,678,294
13	Madhya Pradesh	Madhya Pradesh High Court	85,047,748
14	Maharashtra	Bombay High Court, Mumbai	124,862,220
15	Manipur	High Court of Manipur, Imphal	3100000
16	Meghalaya	Shillong	3772000
17	Mizoram	Gauhati High Court Aizawl Branch	1309000
18	Nagaland	Gauhati High Court	2,249,695
19	Odisha	Orissa High Court	47,098,218
20	Punjab	Chandigarh High Court	30,451,858
21	Rajasthan	Rajasthan High Court	81,032,689
22	Sikkim	High Court of Sikkim	657,867
23	Tamil Nadu	Madras High Court, Chennai	83,704,074
24	Telangana	High Court for Telangana, Hyderabad	39,362,732
25	Tripura	High Court of Tripura	4,169,794
26	Uttar Pradesh	Allagabhad High Court	231,521,022
27	Uttarakhand	High Court of Uttarakhand	11,250,858
28	West Bengal	Calcutta High Court	99,609,303

Graph of State Population in specified High Court Jurisdictions

	Name Of Union Territory	High Court	Population
1	Andaman and Nicobar Islands	Kolkata High Court, Kolkata	398,774
2	Chandigarh	High Court Chandigarh, Chandigarh	1,148,000
3	Dadra and Nagar Haveli	Bombay High Court, Mumbai	453,229
4	Daman and Diu	Bombay High Court, Mumbai	320,756
5	Delhi	High Court of Delhi, New Delhi	30,291,000
6	Lakshadweep	High Court of Kerala, Cochin	65,998
7	Pondicherry	Madras High Court, Chennai	836,000
8	Jammu& Kashmir	High Court of J&k, Srinagar	14,957,251

Graph of UT Population in specified High Court Jurisdiction in India
State Population as per the Unique Identification Aathaar on May 2020 data approximately about 1383005686.
There are 24 High Courts has jurisdiction over of 28 States along with 8 Union Territories, and has under the Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India for 1.38 billion People.

Question of Facts:
Does the higher state population requires a additional bench?

• If so, why Tamilnadu with population over 8 crore, does have Madurai bench for Madras High Court?
• WHEN the concept of population decides the high court additional bench requirement, Uttar Pradesh with population over 23 crore, should have additional bench in deed.

If this research is being recognized base on systematic research, the first requirement for Allagabhad High Court should has additional bench before we think of implementing the additional bench to supreme court where the Human Rights cases over warmed population in the states of Uttar Pradesh.

Does Two or more states can share one High Court, if their population is low?

• Chandigarh High Court has covered Punjab and Haryana States
• Madras High Court has covered Tamilnadu and Pondicherry
• High Court of Kerala has covered Kerala and Lakshadweep.
• Guwahati High Court has covered Arunachal, Assam, Mizoram and Nagaland
• High Court of Bombay has covered Maharashtra and Goa.
• WHEN the consolidated population of two or more states to set one High court Jurisdiction, there the area of the states are considered alternative factor for reach ability and better administration.

Does the Population Ratio Vs High Courts set right?

• If 24 High Courts in India has managing the Indian Territory with the population of 1383005686 people, the right ration for High Court should be
  24 High Courts ; 138 Crore
  1 High Court : 5.76 Crore

WHEN, the 5.76 Crore population requires 1 High Court and when exceeding this population, a High Court requires additional bench for better administration for them self or better reach ability for the people.

Fundamental Research:

Would It be possible for 1 Supreme Court succeed in giving Judicial remedy as per the article 14 to the 138 crore population with an Additional Bench?

I should not narrate any bias statement, for the sake of this article since Supreme Court of India is not only the Supreme but which conferred the right of common men by several judgments and has done several judicial reviews and being one of best citizen care court, among other country courts.

The judicial review of Supreme Court of India and conferred the rights of common man during the period of Emergency, Former Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi is highly effective to bring the democracy back to India and where legislators has been restrained to modify the fundamental rights of the citizen by any acts and supreme court of India conferred the rights till and played a important role and protect the citizen successfully and no doubt that the citizen obtained best remedy against any arbitrary arrest and proceeding for several years.

However, the feasibility question for the people to reach the Supreme Court in the political, economical and social aspects states that Supreme Court of India has been out of reach for some of significant population from South India and this required separate research, however the constrains and upcoming challenges has been quoted as below.

Political Reasons:

The Southern part of India, has superior advantages in developing the secularism ever since, the Union has been divided into diversified states based on the languages. Though constitution of the country has guaranteed the people with fundamental rights, the federalism of the central has no significant control over the southern states where the southern state political parties like DMK, ADMK, TSP, YSR congress, Janatha dal has well established as state parties over 30 years and continue to be biggest bottle neck and barriers to the entry of National Parties in the southern states of India.

The Southern India has been out of reach, not only by geographical reasons but also the political reasons beyond the coverage of legal system. The establishment of Supreme Court with additional bench in south, may be one of the entry to bring the state under the perusal of central governance. Government of India, initiative to create additional bench will be more unique rather than any citizen pleading the same before the supreme court of India.

Geographical Aspects

India as sub continent, It is the seventh-largest country in the world, with a total area of 3,287,263 square kilometres (1,269,219 sq mi) and Supreme Court of India at it’s geographical location and jurisdiction. Despite of the Souther states, There are union territories as islands and they were no records to trace how many cases taken up to Superior courts. According to the recent surveys, the cases filed by the southern states to Supreme Court where far less than the petitions filed by the northern states and it doesn’t mean that southern street has not had any appeals but in reality of facts, the southern state people has less reach ability to the Supreme Court of India due to other reasons, mainly the affordability of the common men to reach the doors of Supreme Court of India.

Indian courts have being well managed by procedures for over 200 years despite of the distance of the country; where all the courts following uniform procedures throughout India for preserving the data, records and decisions. The modern Internet Era has influenced the Indian courts to upgrade them with modern technology for processing the functions, slowly, gradually and but not firmly due to the upraising secular policies of the state.

Economic Aspects:

If you examine the affordability in filing any petitions, you will be surprised how much difficult to reach the supreme court for common men and women and that’s going to make every one think, the significant importance of the additional bench establishment in India for better Governance.

Would this can be task of the legislative parliamentary headed by Prime Minister to establishment of courts?
Or, Would this can be task of Judicial supremacy headed by Chief Justice of Supreme court?
Or, Would this can be task of common men, filing a petition before Supreme Court for appropriate remeady?

Written By: Ravikumar Vellingiri, B.A.LL.B (Hons)
Researcher trying to obtain your feedback of this article and you may post you feed back to [email protected]