BEST JUDGE FOR THE CASE

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court, 29.9.2008
Chandigarh.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CLEARING BACK LOG:

Assuming more than 50% of the advocates arguing their cases are not aware of complete law / facts concerning their case, framing of Roster becomes all the more important.

1. APPOINT BEST JUDGE FOR THE CASE:

EXPLANATION: SOURCE OF APPOINTMENTS

A. Lawyers whose main practice has been under Article 226 of Constitution of India (commonly known as inherent Powers) including conducting employees cases/rules regulations etc.

Such Judges are better for cases under Art 226 only and not for cases of Laws under Art 245.

B. Lawyers whose main practice has been under Law laid under Article 245 of Constitution of India (the only LAW ) i.e. RSA, CR, corporate laws, Taxation Laws, land laws, financial, recovery, etc

These Judges are better for all types of cases i.e. under Art 245 and also for cases under Art 226.

C Promotees. Out of promotees only 20% are better in laws under Art 245/226. Others are better for criminal Benches only.

Any judge who as a lawyer has worked under laws of Art 245 can easily do cases under Art 226. But a Lawyer whose has done cases only under Art 226 cannot easily do cases under Art 245.

(Courts of Law may not be converted into a Law college for Judges.)

2. ONE JUDGE FOR ONE TYPE OF CASE. (KEEP SAME STENOS).

EXPLANATION: If one Judge is appointed for say rent cases only for one year. Then after 15 Days he will be able to dispose off 30 to 50 cases a day.

NO DRAWBACK: If he starts favoring one particular advocate, then unlike as of now the said advocate will be known within few a days and will be morally lynched by the Bar. (In present circumstances favoritism is still done but is not so commonly known. In case of only one judge doing only one type of cases instances of favoritism will be easily known.)


3. INCOMPLETE CASES BE LISTED BEFORE ASTT REGISTRARS.

EXPLANATION: SERVICE INCOMPLETE OR PLEADINGS INCOMPLETE.

4. JUDGES TEND TO REWARD PERJURY. THIS HAS TO BE REVERSED.


Dated 29.9.2008 CA KD Aggarwal
Centenary office. (Since 1908).

NOTE BY AUTHOR;

The roster issued by the Chief Justice in January 2009 saw substantial changes. All DBs for writs were dissolved. Writs were listed before single judges. Separate list was issued for completion cases which were listed before registrars. All this changes saw disposal go up by 200%.