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
Monday, January 6, 2025

Centre Must Ensure Creation Of A High Court Bench In West UP

Posted in: Judiciary
Sat, Sep 21, 24, 12:15, 4 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 11107
West UP since last 78 years of independence! Why can’t Centre think out of the box and take bold initiative in this regard to hammer out a permanent solution on setting up of a Bench

"The good of the people is the greatest law"- Cicero

It is really most touching to see how Centre has most callously cold-shouldered the most legitimate and most compelling demand for a High Court Bench in West UP since last 78 years of independence! Why can’t Centre think out of the box and take bold initiative in this regard to hammer out a permanent solution on setting up of a Bench so that the litigants especially those who are poor are not made to travel whole night and half day all the way not even till Lucknow which has a High Court Bench since 1948 and which is so near to Allahabad but the litigants of West UP are made to travel even far away right till Allahabad most horribly to seek justice which in itself is the biggest betrayal of Constitution and justice?

It is Centre which has got people’s mandate to address the problems which they face and so under no circumstances it cannot be ever allowed to just conveniently shrug off its huge responsibility by blaming someone else for it and washing its hands away from this whole key issue that has been hogging the limelight since such a long time!

Of course, this has definitely done no good rather damaged most seriously the untarnished credibility of both Centre and so also the Supreme Court which does not tolerate cheating even in a Mayor election as we saw some time back in Chandigarh and interferes very rightly but on this affecting millions of litigants has failed utterly to do anything substantial in this regard and ensuring that a High Court Bench is created in West UP as was recommended by even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself who recommended three High Court Benches for undivided UP including a permanent High Court Bench for West UP yet nearly 50 years later not a single High Court Bench created on its recommendations in UP even though on its recommendations High Court Benches were created in other States like Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches in Nagpur and Panaji and has far less pending cases than UP which tops the State list in having maximum pending cases and here too West UP owes for majority of pending cases of UP and for which permanent Bench was recommended yet most disgracefully not a single created for 30 districts of West UP and even for West Bengal which already had a High Court Bench at Port Blair for Andaman and Nicobar islands for just few lakhs people one more was created at Jalpaiguri as recommended for just 6 districts and so also for Madurai in Tamil Nadu for few districts! Tamil Nadu has just 7 crore population and West UP more than 10 crores still not even a single High Court Bench created! Why this is never taken suo motu cognizance by Supreme Court in last more than 50 years?

It must be asked: If this is not the outcome of a most diabolical, dangerous, discriminatory, derisive, dastardly and despicable discrimination then what else is it yet we did not hear even a whimper of protest not even from the Supreme Court which is considered the last bastion as a ray of hope for the litigants for such a long time! It is heart wrenching and most devastating to see how mercilessly Centre has deprived West UP from having even a single High Court Bench in last nearly 80 years! Why has Centre kept such a burning issue in the background for such a long time defies logic and is completely incomprehensible?

The need of the hour is: Centre must act on this Bench issue forthwith so that the litigants gain the most especially those who are most poor, deprived and underprivileged sections of society! There is definitely a stark disconnect between the need of the litigants of West UP for a High Court Bench as was even acknowledged by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself who recommended permanent Bench still 50 years later Centre has not demonstrated any political will to take any action in this regard! Silence of Centre on such a key issue is most deafening to see. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said famously that:
Silence is betrayal!

In all fairness, Centre must stop betraying more than 10 crore people of West UP which can happen only by approving if not multiple at least a single Bench! Karnataka has just just about 6 crore population which means 4 crores less than West UP yet it has not just High Court but also multiple High Court Benches and two High Court Benches were created in one go by Centre in 2008 in Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts only but for 30 districts of West UP not approving even a single High Court Bench with more than 10 crores population! Even for Telangana with just 3 crore or 3.5 crores population Centre approved separate Statehood and separate High Court in 2014 by creating it as a separate State on June 2, 2014 but for West UP with more than 10 crores people not a single Bench most disgracefully and most disconcertingly is being approved by forwarding one lame excuse or the other which makes me hang my head in shame!

How ruthlessly Centre has crushed the most legitimate and most compelling demand for a High Court Bench in West UP is for all of us to see for ourselves! Why Centre finds itself in a conundrum on creating High Court Bench in West UP which is an open and shut case is most baffling indeed? Why Centre and UP State Government have never placed West UP on driver’s seat due to its huge contribution to State’s economy more than 75%, to put it mildly, cannot be ever forgiven or forgotten?

Why can’t Centre let the past bury its dead and shed off its status quo approach on creating more High Court Benches in most populated State of India with maximum pending cases that is UP which has just one Bench and that too so near to Allahabad at Lucknow and nowhere else? Why we see that so many leaders of ruling party BJP in Centre and in UP like Mr Sanjeev Kumar Baliyan have strongly batted for separate Statehood for West UP but Centre most damningly and most deplorably is just not ready to create even a single High Court Bench in West UP or even in any other part of UP? Why former PM late AB Vajpayee as Leader of Opposition in Parliament most forcefully demanded High Court Bench for West UP in Meerut in 1986?

More specifically, I wish to point out that it is West UP which should have both High Court and a Bench because majority of the pending cases are not from East UP but from West UP yet we see that it is East UP which has both High Court at Allahabad and a single Bench at Lucknow and nowhere else! How long will Centre keep on just bluffing, bulldozing and blaming others like Governor which it itself appoints for the denial of even a single High Court Bench in West UP which it so richly deserves yet has been denied most mercilessly? It is really very hard to comprehend why Centre is dilly-dallying on such a key legal issue since last 78 years of independence while not taking even an year to create a High Court Bench at Lucknow in July 1948 so near to Allahabad which already had High Court since last more than two and a half centuries! This is exactly what I find so baffling indeed!

It cannot and should not be ever lost on anyone that it is West UP which owes for maximum pending cases in any region of not only just UP but also in any other part of India which only serves to further necessitates the creation of a High Court Bench in West UP! Dr BR Ambedkar who is the key architect of Constitution favoured partition of UP into three parts – Western, Eastern and Central but Centre in last 78 years has completely crushed the hope for even a single High Court Bench of West UP which makes me hang my head in shame! West UP has 30 districts and so it must have at least 3 High Court Benches but Centre is just not ready to concede even a single Bench on one pretext or other which litigants, lawyers and people of West UP, quite naturally, find most infuriating!

How long will BJP led Centre keep saying that creation of High Court Bench is in pipeline or blame shamelessly Governor and extricate itself most easily as we saw recently saying that Centre has not problem with creation of High Court Bench in West UP and keep apportioning the share of blame on Governor appointed by Centre itself or on someone else for it? How terrible! How ruthless!

It merits just no reiteration that Centre’s complete inaction on this score has punctured its tall claims that it stands committed to equality and this is the most flagrant violation of Article 14 of our Constitution and yet even Supreme Court has never dared to speak out anything on it leaving everything on Centre alone as we saw in a PIL which was dismissed in November 2018 on crying need for a Bench in West UP which has done just nothing on it in last 78 years most ruthlessly even though it has taken suo motu cognizance on very petty issues in some other cases! Why we see many small States with far less population like Assam, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal having multiple High Court Benches and most populated State of India with more than 26 crores population which is more than even the population of Pakistan and so many other countries has just one Bench even though Allahabad High Court is the biggest High Court in whole world with maximum members in Bar Council and still one Bench created 76 years ago and that too so close to Allahabad and nowhere else and attached litigants of West UP with not even Lucknow but have to travel further right uptill Allahabad to seek justice forcing litigants of West UP to travel like a donkey so far whole night and half day by train most atrociously which cannot be ever justified under any circumstances? It is the most insensitive thing on earth to not even acknowledge that West UP has been most wrongly deprived of a High Court Bench by Centre who gets elected by people and not some Governor who is not elected by people but just appointed by Centre itself!

It cannot be lost on anyone that even incumbent UP CM Yogi Adityanath had recommended a High Court Bench in West UP in Meerut in January 2024 to Allahabad High Court in an official letter but withdrew it the very next day! This itself in my opinion is the best testimony that how compelling the case of West UP High Court Bench is and yet has been put in the shelf on one pretext or the other which I find most atrocious! Still let us yet fervently hope that Centre will wake up sooner or later!

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