Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Friday, January 10, 2025

Why Not Even A Single HC Bench For West UP In 77 Years?

Posted in: Judiciary
Mon, Jan 1, 24, 18:11, 1 Year ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 9610
It is a monumental tragedy of the worst epic proportions that Uttar Pradesh which as we all know fully well is the most populated State of India

It is a monumental tragedy of the worst epic proportions that Uttar Pradesh which as we all know fully well is the most populated State of India with maximum number of pending cases has only one High Court Bench in Lucknow and that too in Eastern UP only where already there was High Court since centuries at Allahabad and nowhere else! It was way back in 1955 that the then UP CM Dr Sampoornanand had strongly recommended for a High Court Bench in Meerut after a delegation of elected representatives and lawyers met him and convinced him of the dire need of the same but the then PM Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru turned it down! We saw how later other UP CM like Mr ND Tiwari among others also recommended for a High Court Bench in West UP but Centre again turned it down! This is definitely most baffling indeed!

Worst of all, we witnessed later how mercilessly rubbing salt to the wounds of being wrongly denied a High Court Bench inspite of repeated agitations by the lawyers of West UP when Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by none other than Centre itself headed by none other than Justice Jaswant Singh and not politician Jaswant Singh who was a former Supreme Court Judge and who most strongly recommended 3 High Court Benches for undivided UP at Agra in Western UP, Dehradun and Nainital yet Centre deemed it totally unfit to approve even a single High Court Bench in any of these 3 cities while simultaneously and most astoundingly having just no compunction at all to approve a High Court Bench at Aurangabad in Maharashtra which already had High Court Benches in Nagpur and Panaji and so also at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal for few districts which already had a Bench at Port Blair in Andaman and Nicobar islands for few lakhs of people but for more than 10 crore people of West UP and nearly one crore people of hilly region of undivided UP now a separate State named Uttarakhand not a single Bench approved which led to huge agitations by people of hilly areas culminating in Centre approving Statehood and High Court itself at Nainital for which earlier it did not allow even a single Bench! This is the real rub! When will this deadly, derisive, divisive and dangerous discrimination end between northern States like UP, Bihar and Rajasthan and southern States who get not just High Court Bench but High Court itself at the drop of a hat?

The seminal truth is that Centre has been most biased when it comes to the question of setting up High Court Benches in the big and needy Northern India States like UP, Bihar and Rajasthan for which it has displayed most miserly approach but when it comes to the Southern States, it has been most magnanimous for Southern States like Telangana where Statehood was approved in 2014 for just 3 crore population and Karnataka where it took no time create two Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts only.

It is absolutely astounding to see how brazenly, blindly and brutally Centre has rode roughshod over the most legitimate and dire need for a Bench in West UP! Centre has just no business to keep denying West UP even a single Bench for such a long time! How can Centre ever be oblivious of the stark truth that it is West UP which owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and owes for nearly half of the total population of UP and contributes more than 75% of the State’s revenue yet is mercilessly denied even a Single Bench due to which the litigants have to travel whole night and half day all the way till not even Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest injustice? All that I am saying and submitting is that why can’t West UP have even a single Bench more than 77 years after independence?

It must be asked: Why Centre favours multiple High Court Benches for peaceful States like Maharashtra and Karnataka and High Court itself for tiny regions like Telangana with just 3 or 3.5 crore population but for West UP with more than 10 crore population not even a High Court Bench is being approved? It is a Himalayan blunder that West UP is being deprived of even a single Bench even though none other than the former PM late Mr AB Vajpayee most vocally demanded High Court Bench for West UP at Meerut in Parliament in 1986 yet nearly 40 years later we still see no Bench created! It is an irrefutable fact that former Union Minister and former Mumbai Police Commissioner and BJP MP from Baghpat Dr Satyapal Singh demanded two High Court Benches for West UP in Meerut and Agra and so also at Jhansi in Bundelkhand and so also at Gorakhpur in Purvanchal and in Varanasi in Lok Sabha on March 9, 2016 yet after so many years all we see is a big blank and nothing else as Centre has done just virtually nothing on it which is the biggest tragedy perpetrated by Centre itself who inspite of pulling all the strings of power has been just sitting idle in taking any action since last nearly 10 years!

I really just can’t discern a single bona fide reason as to why West UP can’t have a single Bench for 30 districts of whom 22 districts lawyers have assembled under one banner under the leadership of Meerut Bar demanding Bench and have been going on strike also as for 6 months in 2001 and 2014 and so also for many weeks as in 2009 and many times for few months and one month hunger strike in 1976 and so also strike every Saturday since May 1981 till date yet Centre has all along brazenly disregarded the legitimate and compelling demand for a Bench in any of the districts of West UP! What has swept me completely off the feet is that even now Centre is doing just nothing on this to address the long pending most legitimate and compelling demand for a Bench in West UP! This is really atrocious!

By all accounts, the arrogance of Centre in denying West UP even a single Bench is on full display! What piques me most is: Why big States like UP and Rajasthan have only one Bench and most peaceful States like Maharashtra and Karnataka have multiple Benches and most lawless State like Bihar has none? Why do those in media not put questions to Centre on it and publish more editorials on such vital issues which directly affect the litigants most? What is often not recognized but is important to highlight is that voters in West UP do not merely elect a government for Eastern UP alone but for the development and welfare of all regions then why no government in power in Centre has ever ensured that a High Court Bench is created in regions other than in Eastern UP as for instance in Western UP, Bundelkhand and Purvanchal?

What will strike a chord with the people is what is done for them at the grassroot level! If a Bench is created in any region in any State, it is the whole region that stands to gain the most. When Congress in 2008 created two High Court Benches for mere 4 and 8 districts only at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively where, the whole region stood to gain and this is the real reason that why we see more prosperity in the South! What is the predicament of Centre in not doing anything on this score?

The question that really torments, troubles and tortures my peace of mind most is: Why has Centre refused to allow Benches for most needy States like UP, Rajasthan and lawless Bihar? Why Union Minister Mr Sanjeev Singh Baliyan just some time back in a Jat Summit in Meerut batted for West UP being created as a separate State with Meerut being the capital where High Court to be created but on ground we witness that Centre is not ready to approve even a single Bench on one pretext or the other? The irresistible conclusion that one can arrive at from it is simply this: Centre is just not at all keen to take any initiative to address the long pending demand which is most compelling also as conceded even by Union Home Minister Amit Shah and many other BJP tall leaders like Union Defence Minister Rajnath Singh who was earlier UP CM also and strongly raised the demand for Bench in West UP and a galaxy of such tall leaders including former PM late Atal Bihari Vajpayee also who demanded Bench in Meerut! It is a matter of deepest regret that Centre has been most stubborn in not sympathetically considering one of the most legitimate demand for a Bench in West UP which is just not acceptable!

It is a proven fact that UP is progressing most quickly in all directions under the bold and dynamic leadership of the incumbent CM Shri Yogi Adityanath but what is totally lacking is the firm determination to create even a single Bench in any nook and corner of UP other than the one created by Pandit Nehru more than 75 years ago at Lucknow where it was just not needed at all as it is so close to Allahabad where High Court itself is located! Yogi Adityanath had himself demanded Bench for Gorakhpur in 1999 and in 2015 even presented a Private Member Bill in this regard yet even as he is in his second tenure we see not even a single Bench created anywhere in whole of UP! At first blush, one can make out most easily as to which is the State in India that needs more High Court Benches yet Centre most chillingly is just refusing to acknowledge the clear writing on the wall and do anything to change to meet the present situation! This is what I really find most distressing!

Why can’t Centre spare a food of thought at least for what senior and eminent lawyer Mr Misbahuddin Siddiqui who is the former President of Meerut District Bar very rightly pointed out saying: The problem is that the Allahabad High Court has the highest number of pending cases. The pressure is huge. Allahabad is very far from Western UP. It is around 800 km from Saharanpur. Eight other High Courts of eight different States or their Bench are closer to West UP most astonishingly, and interestingly Lahore High Court in Pakistan is closer than Allahabad High Court. The cost of travelling so far to Allahabad, and then staying there is huge for poor people. That is why we have been demanding a High Court Bench. Successive governments have denied us this.”

How fair will it be for Centre to ignore that none other than one of the most eminent jurist that Indian soil has ever produced and so also senior Supreme Court lawyer late Mr Soli J Sorabjee himself as Attorney General had strongly said in 2001 that:
The Centre without any recommendation from the State Chief Minister or Chief Justice of a State is fully empowered under our Constitution to set up a High Court Bench anywhere it wants at its own volition”?

How long can Centre afford to ignore what Mr BN Krishnamani who is the former President of Supreme Court Bar Association so very commendably said a couple of years back that:
Only by the creation of a Bench of High Court in West UP will the people be able to secure speedy and cheap justice at their doorsteps?”

How can Centre ever brush aside what Mr Gajendra Pal Singh who is the former President of Meerut Bar elected as President on multiple occasions so very aptly lamented that:
Western UP still does not have a High Court Bench. Think of this, Western UP is 98,933 square kilometers in area. It is bigger than countries like Hungary, Portugal and Jordan. Plus, the population of West UP is huge. We have been demanding a High Court Bench for so long. Successive governments have done nothing about it. This High Court Bench has been promised to us multiple times by different politicians. But nothing has happened. All those statements are only political statements, nothing else!” It is because of all this that the lawyers of West UP of 22 districts as decided by Central Action Committee” spearheaded by Meerut Bar will march on January 18, 2024 straight to PM Mr Narendra Modi residence and submit memorandum demanding High Court Bench in West UP reiterating yet again the same age old demand from the time when I nearing 50 was not even born! Centre must act now immediately!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top