- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Brijesh Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P And Another
Concise Analytical Summary of the Opinion (S.H.A. Raza, J.)
Factual and Procedural Background
Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh, Advocate practicing at the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, filed a writ petition (in the nature of mandamus and treated as a Public Interest Litigation) requesting that the State of Uttar Pradesh sanction at least 1,000 posts of Class II, III and IV employees for the Allahabad High Court and that the Allahabad High Court be directed to appoint at least 1,000 such employees to speed up disposal of pending cases.
On 4 February 2000 a Division Bench entertained the petition and directed the State of Uttar Pradesh and the High Court to file counter-affidavits within two weeks. The State Government did not file the counter-affidavit within that time and remained largely inactive on the requests made by the High Court since 1994, a delay the Court notes as contributing to slow case disposal.
The Allahabad High Court filed a counter-affidavit describing prior communications to the State (including D.O. No. 18.A/94 (PSR) dated 28.2.1994 and a reminder dated 6.12.1994) requesting creation of 449 posts; of these, only a limited number of posts (10 Assistant Registrars, 6 Translators and 3 Nazirs) had been sanctioned. The counter-affidavit detailed present sanctioned strength, actual working strength, identified shortages in the Lucknow Bench and overall administrative burdens, and indicated further requests made subsequently (including a request for 231 Class III posts for the Lucknow Bench made on 3.2.2000).
The Court examined constitutional provisions relevant to appointments and financial sanction for High Court staff (Article 229) and, after considering the High Court's material, issued a writ of mandamus directing the State Government to accord financial sanction for specified posts for the Allahabad High Court and for the Lucknow Bench within ten weeks of production of a certified copy of the order. The petition was allowed.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the petitioner (an advocate) may maintain a public interest writ petition seeking direction to the State to sanction and the High Court to appoint staff for the High Court (i.e., maintainability/locus to sue in public interest).
- Whether the State Government is obliged to consider and accord financial sanction for creation of posts requested by the High Court (and whether failure to sanction posts amounts to improper interference with judicial functioning).
- Whether a writ in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing the State to accord financial sanction for creation of specific categories and numbers of posts for the High Court and its Lucknow Bench within a specified time period.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner's (Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh) Plea
- Sought issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to sanction at least 1,000 posts of Class II, III and IV employees for the Allahabad High Court and to direct the High Court to appoint at least 1,000 such employees to expedite disposal of pending cases.
- Raised the general grievance that inadequate staff strength is causing delay in disposal of cases and impeding justice.
High Court's Submissions (via Counter-Affidavit)
- There has been a tremendous increase in both judicial and administrative workload; requests for additional staff were made to the State Government by the Registrar under the Chief Justice's order (D.O. No. 18.A/94 dated 28.2.1994) and a reminder (6.12.1994).
- A demand for creation of 449 posts was placed; only a small subset of those posts (10 Assistant Registrars, 6 Translators and 3 Nazirs) were sanctioned. Only two of the Assistant Registrar posts were allotted to the Lucknow Bench.
- The High Court provided details of sanctioned strength versus actual working strength at the Lucknow Bench, identifying shortages (for example, shortages of U.D.A, L.D.A and R.G.A) and an assessed additional requirement (variously stated as 176 or a later proposal for 231 Class III posts for the Lucknow Bench).
- Specific administrative needs were highlighted: need for more Private Secretaries / Personal Assistants, need to assess and provide computer staff/data operators, need to assess shortage of Bench Secretaries, and the High Court indicated it would forward concrete proposals to the Chief Justice for onward transmission to the State Government for financial sanction.
- The High Court requested that, where appropriate, the Chief Justice may direct appointment of casual/daily labourers if shortage of Class IV staff is established and funds are not immediately available.
State of Uttar Pradesh
- The State Government did not file a counter-affidavit within the time directed by the Court and, according to the opinion, had not acted on the High Court's proposals dating from 1994 onwards. No substantive defense or explanation by the State is recorded in the opinion.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court's analysis proceeds in a sequence of steps grounded on the factual record and constitutional provisions provided in the materials:
- Maintainability: The Court treated the petition as a Public Interest Litigation and found that Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh, being a conscientious lawyer with a vital interest in the dispensation of justice, had the right to maintain the petition.
- Procedural history and State inaction: The Court noted that after an interim direction (4.2.2000) to file counter-affidavits, the State Government failed to file its counter-affidavit in time. The opinion records the Court's view that delay or failure by the State to respond to the High Court's requests for additional staff contributes to delays in case disposal.
- Substantive factual assessment: The High Court's counter-affidavit supplied documentary requests made to the State (1994 and 1994 reminder) asking for creation of 449 posts, and showed that only limited sanctions had been granted since 1991. The counter-affidavit further quantified sanctioned strength, actual working strength and identified specific shortages at the Lucknow Bench and overall administrative needs (including need for private secretaries, computer staff, bench secretaries, Class IV employees).
- Constitutional and administrative principle: The Court referred to Article 229 of the Constitution to explain the allocation of responsibility: the Chief Justice has power to make appointments to High Court offices and prescribe conditions of service (subject to financial approval by the Governor / State). The administrative expenses of the High Court, including salaries, are charged on the consolidated fund of the State. From this, the Court reasoned that when the Chief Justice, acting according to norms and rules, requests sanction for posts, it is incumbent on the State Government to consider and, where appropriate, grant financial sanction.
- Separation of powers and effect of Executive inaction: The Court articulated that failure by the Executive to grant sanctioned posts (or to respond to bona fide requests) indirectly interferes with judicial functioning because absence of staff and funds impedes dispensation of justice. The Court described the State's long delay (since 1994) as improper and detrimental to the Court's functioning.
- Remedial conclusion: On the basis of the High Court's documented needs, the constitutional framework, and the State's inaction, the Court concluded that issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the State to accord financial sanction for specific posts was appropriate. The Court specified precise numbers and categories for immediate sanction and imposed a timeframe (ten weeks from production of a certified copy of the order) for compliance.
Holding and Implications
PETITION ALLOWED.
Direct holding and orders issued by the Court (direct consequences):
- The Court issued a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State Government to accord financial sanction for the creation of 430 posts in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (specific categories and numbers enumerated in the Court's order) within ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
- The Court also issued a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State Government to accord financial sanction for creation of 231 posts for the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court (93 U.D.A, 90 L.D.A and 48 R.G.A) expeditiously, and in any event within ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
Implications beyond the direct order:
The opinion does not articulate any broader precedent or doctrinal development beyond applying constitutional administrative principles (Article 229) to the facts. The primary practical consequence is the Court's mandatory direction to the State to provide financial sanction for the enumerated posts within the stated timeframe; no new legal principle beyond this application was announced.
Additional Notes and Items Recorded in the Opinion
- The High Court had earlier placed a proposal for 449 posts (detailed in the materials), but the final sanction directed by the Court for the Allahabad High Court in this order amounted to 430 posts (the opinion lists the exact categories and numbers that form part of the order).
- The Court recommended that, where shortages of Class IV staff exist, the Chief Justice may direct the appointment of casual or daily labourers pending financial sanction from the State.
- The opinion references a report by "Justice Malimath" indicating that the main reasons for non-disposal of cases often lie outside the judiciary (this report is used descriptively in the Court's factual and evaluative discussion).
End of summary. This summary strictly reflects only the information contained in the provided opinion and does not add or infer facts beyond that text.
S.H.A Raza, J.:— Mr. Brijesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, who practices in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, by means of the present writ petition, has prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State of U.P to sanction at least 1000 post of Class II, III, and IV employees in the Allahabad High Court and to issue a writ to the Allahabad High Court to appoint at least 1000 Class II, III, and IV employees in the High Court for speedy disposal of the pending cases.
2. The aforesaid writ petition is in the nature of Public Interest Litigation as Mr. Brijesh Kumar is a conscientious lawyer of this Court, who is vitally interested in the process of dispensation of justice. We are of the view that he has a right to maintain the writ petition.
3. On 4.2.2000, when the writ petition was entertained a Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order :—
“By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has raised the question of appointment of the staff in the High Court. According to him even Constitutional Authorities like Prime Minister and the President of India have expressed their concern over the delay in the disposal of the cases by the Courts. The difficulties which are being faced by the High Courts in clearing off the arrears have not been considered by the State Government by increasing the strength of the staff which who are already overworked, as a result of which the obligation of the Courts to dispose of the cases, has been impeded.”
Let the State of Uttar Pradesh as well as the High Court file counter-affidavit positively within two weeks. List this petition immediately thereafter.”
4. In spite of the fact that the aforesaid order was passed on 4.2.2000, the State Government has not cared to file the counter-affidavit. The delay in filing the counter-affidavit by the State Government is one of the reasons which causes delay in disposal of the cases by the High Court. Instances are not wanting where the counter-affidavit has not been filed by the State Government even after the lapse of several years.
5. Whenever grievance is raised against the various High Courts of this Country regarding non-disposal of the cases, in public gatherings, where the judiciary is often blamed in not deciding the cases speedily, the Judges who are not expected to speak remained a silent spectators and had to digest the unwanted remarks. The non-disposal of the cases speedily by the Courts, depends upon various factors which have been enumerated in the report submitted by Justice Malimath which indicated that the main reason for non-disposal of the cases does not rest with judiciary but elsewhere and in that regard the State Government as well as the Central Government cannot shirk, with its responsibility.
6. In the recent years litigations have increased considerably and even the poorest sections, may be the daily rated Class IV employees, being aggrieved against the orders passed against them approach the Court. In proportion of the increase in the litigation, the strength of the Judges and the staff has not been increased, in consequence of which the Judges as well as the Staff are unable to cope with the problems. If the strength of the Judges, the staff, construction of more courts buildings and other paraphernalia like library etc. are not increased, it would be difficult for the Judges and the Staff, who are already overworked, to clear off the mounting arrears.
7. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf to the Allahabad High Court wherein it has been indicated that due to tremendous increase in the workload both Judicial and Administrative of the Court, a request was made by the Registrar under the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice to the State Government through Judiciary Secretary and Legal Remembrancer by means of D.O No. 18.A/94 (PSR) dated 28.2.94, for increasing the strength of the staff. Reminder was also sent on 6.12.1994 by the Registrar of the Allahabad High Court for creation of 449 posts for the establishment of the Courts. Out of the aforesaid 449 posts for which the sanction was requested only 10 posts of Assistant Registrar, 6 posts of Translators and 3 posts of Nazir were sanctioned by the Government. Out of these ten posts of Assistant Registrar, Only 2 posts were allotted to the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. It was further averred in the counter-affidavit that the Section Officers were asked to give their requirement in addition to the strength present working for smooth functioning of the Court. Accordingly, the requirement has been worked out, which has been indicated in Annexure CA-3 to the counter-affidavit. Against the sanctioned strength of 234, the present working strength is 214 at Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court and that the total required strength for the smooth working in the Lucknow Bench is 176, including 71 U.D.A, 71 L.D.A and 34 R.G.A
8. It was also indicated that recently three Sections i.e Public Relation Officer Registry and Pass have newly been created in which 14 staff members have been deputed.
9. Apart from the above, 1 U.D.A and 1. L.D.A are deputed to work with the Deputy Registrar (A) for N.D.P.S work and 1 R.G.A to work with Deputy Registrar (J). These three have also been posted out of office strength 1 U.D.A out of office strength is also looking after the work of EPBX Exchange and that 5 U.D.As promoted against the vacancy at Lucknow Bench, have been detained at Allahabad High Court.
10. It was further submitted in the counter-affidavit that according to re-allocation of the strength of Allahabad High Court at Allahabad and at Lucknow Bench vide order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, dated 14.5.1998, there is actual shortage, out of present strength, of 6 U.D.A 2 L.D.A and 11 R.G.A at Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. It was also mentioned in the counter-affidavit that at present, out of the sanctioned strength, there is shortage of 55 (22 U.D.A, 19 L.D.A and 14 R.G.A) in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court and further an additional strength of 176 (71 U.D.A, 71 L.D.A and 34 R.G.A), are required in addition to the present sanctioned strength for the smooth functioning of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court. The request of the High Court dated 28.2.94 and 6.12.94 has still been pending before the State Government. It was pointed out further in the counter-affidavit that after 1991, only posts of 10 Assistant Registrar, 6 Translators and 3 Nazirs have been sanctioned by the Government and the proposal for the remaining 449 additional posts has been pending before the State Government since 1994.
11. A request was made by the Additional Registrar of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Allahabad for the creation of 231 post of Class III cadre; U.D.A, L.D.A and R.G.A
12. In addition to above, due to considerable increase in the litigation, the Private Secretaries and the Personal Assistants attached with the Hon'ble Judges are not sufficient in number to cope with the work in spite of their sincere efforts and the hard work by working even after office hours till late night. The Private Secretaries and the Personal Assistants are required to attend the residential office of the Hon'ble Judges in the morning and in the evening for taking dictation of the reserved judgments and in connection with other works entrusted to them by the Hon'ble Judges. It has further been noticed that due to heavy burden of work, they find it difficult to cope with the day to day work. It has become necessary for smooth functioning of the Court and speedy disposal of the work, some more Private Secretaries and Personal Assistants be provided for taking dictation and typing work. The Private Secretaries and Personal Assistants, all the time have to take dictation either in the Court or in the Chamber and they do not have the spare time to get it typed within a stipulated period. The Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court at Allahabad and the Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow may place a suitable proposal before Hon'ble the Chief Justice to increase the strength of Personal Assistants or Stenographers at the High Court establishment. After the approval of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the Scheme prepared by the Registrar General for the Allahabad High Court and the Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow may be sent to the State Government to accord the financial sanction.
13. It has also been noticed that the computers have been installed in the High Court as well as in the Chambers of the Hon'ble Judges and are likely to be installed in the offices also. The Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court and the Registrar of Lucknow Bench may also assess the requirements of the computer data operator, computer operator or other computer staff and may submit a report before Hon'ble the Chief Justice. If Hon'ble Chief Justice will be satisfied that the demand is genuine, the requirement may be placed before the State Government to accord the financial sanction for the same.
14. Likewise, the Registrar General and the Registrar, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow may also assess the shortage of Bench Secretaries in the establishment and may place a proposal before Hon'ble the Chief Justice. If Hon'ble the Chief Justice will find it appropriate, the requirement may be placed before the State Government to accord the financial sanction for the same.
15. Article 229 of the Constitution of India which deals with the Officers and Servant and the expenses of the High Court, a power has been vested with Hon'ble the Chief Justice to make appointment to any office connected with the Court, Condition of service of the Officers and the Servant of the High Court shall be as such as may be prescribed by the Rules made by Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High Court or by some other Judge or Officer of the Court authorised by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice to make rule for the purpose but those rules as far as they relate to their salaries, allowances, leave or pension, required approval of the Governor of the State. The administrative expenses of the High Court including all salaries, allowances, pension payable to or in respect of the Officers or Servant of the Court, shall be charged upon the consolidated funds of the State and any fees or any allowances taken by the Court, shall form part of that fund.
16. Thus it is evident that power to make appointment to the Staff of the High Court is vested with Hon'ble the Chief Justice, who may fix the strength of the staff in accordance with the norms and the rules and when Hon'ble the Chief Justice ask for the sanction of the posts from the State Government, it is incumbent upon the State Government to consider that request. If the strength of the staff in accordance with the rules and the norms is not sanctioned by the State Government, then it would amount, indirectly, an interference into the judicial functioning of the Courts, because in the absence of the required staff, the work of the dispensation of Justice shall be badly affected.
17. The Constitution of India is based on doctrine of separation of powers where powers of Executive, Legislature and Judiciary have been indicated. But, it is really unfortunate that when the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High Court, according to norms and the rules, ask the State Government to accord financial sanction for the creation of posts, the request is not conceded to. This sort of attitude by the Executive cannot be said to be proper.
18. Due to non-availability of the funds and the Staff, the expenditure of which is to be charged upon the consolidated funds of the State, the entire work of dispensation of justice is impeded. It is incumbent upon the State Government to provide adequate staff as demanded by the High Court within reasonable time but, it is really unfortunate that since 1994 the State Government has slept over the matter and has not met with the requirement of the staff of this Court as a result of which the judicial functioning of this Court has been adversely affected.
19. It is a matter of concern that although by means of the letter dated 6.12.94, the Registrar of the High Court at Allahabad, under the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, urged the State Government to accord financial sanction for entertainment of the following categories of the Court's establishment :—
1. Joint Registrar (Bhasha) 1 2. Deputy Registrar (Bhasha) 1 3. Assistant Registrar 10 4. Section Officer 15 5. Section Officer of Bhasha Anubhag 1 6. Section Officer Bench Secretaries Section 1 7. Section Officer Private Secretaries Section 1 8. Section Officer Confidential Section 2 9. Bench Secretaries 38 10. Personal Assistants 79 11. Cashier-cum-Accountants 6 12. Accountants (in U.D.As Grade) 6 13. Translators (in U.D.As Grade) 6 14. Additional Court Officer (Protocol) 3 15. Additional Court Officer (Establishment) 3 16. Upper Division Assistants 93 17. Lower Division Assistants 123 18. Routine Grade Clerks 58 19. Telephone Monitor (in U.D.As Scale) 2 Total 449
20. But no decision was taken by the State Government. The strength of the Secretriat and other departments of the State, in the recent past, have increased considerably in proportion to workload, but the strength of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, has not been increased in proportion to workload. Similar is the position in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The actual strength sanctioned of the U.D As in the Lucknow Bench is 114 but the actual working strength at present in 108. Thus, there is shortage of 6 U.D As. in the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court. As far as the posts of L.D.As are concerned, the sanctioned strength is 73, out of which only 71 have been working thus, there is a shortage of 2 L.D.As The actual strength sanctioned of R.G.As is 17, but the actual working strength is 6, thus there is a shortage of 11 R.G.As in the Lucknow Bench. Thus, there is shortage of 19 (U.D.A, L.D.A and R.G.A) in terms of allocation of strength of the High Court at Allahabad and Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. Vide order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, dated 14.5.98, apart from the above, new sections have been created at Lucknow Bench and the staff was deputed out of the existing strength as indicated in paras-7, 8, and 10 of the counter-affidavit filed by the High Court. It is, thus, evident that there is shortage of 22 U.D.As, 19 L.D.As, and 14 R.G.As in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. An additional strength of 176 (71 L.D.A and 34 R.G.A) are required in addition to the sanctioned strength for the smooth functioning of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, for which a request was made by the Registrar of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, to the Registrar of the Allahabad High Court on 3.2.2000 for the creation of 231 posts of Class III cadre of U.D.A, L.D.A and R.G.A but no action has yet been taken by the State Government.
21. Besides the above, there is shortage of Class IV staff as well, that can be assessed by the Allahabad High Court at Allahabad and the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The Registrar general of the High Court, Allahabad and the Registrar of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court may assess the required strength of Class IV employees and submit a proposal to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, who may forward the same to the State Government for financial sanction. If Hon'ble the Chief Justice will find that there is shortage of strength of Class IV employees, he may direct the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court and the Registrar of the Lucknow Bench, to appoint casual labourers and daily labourers to perform the job.
22. In view of what has been indicated hereinabove, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the State Government to accord financial sanction for the creation of 430 posts in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad as indicated below, within a period of ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order :—
1. Joint Registrar (Bhasha) 1 2. Deputy Registrar (Bhasha) 1 3. Section Officer 15 4. Section Officer of Bhasha Anubhag 1 5. Section Officer Bench Secretaries Section 1 6. Section Officer Private Secretaries Section 1 7. Section Officer Confidential Section 2 8. Bench Secretaries 38 9. Personal Assistants 79 10 Cashier-cum-Accountants 6 11. Accountants (in U.D.As Grade) 6 12. Additional Court Officer (Protocol) 3 13. Upper Division Assistants 93 14. Lower Division Assistants 123 15. Routine Grade Clerks 58 16. Telephone Monitor (in U.D.As Scale) 2 Total 430
A writ in the nature of mandamus is also issued commanding the State Government to accord financial sanction for the creation of 231 posts (93 U.D.A, 90 L.D.A and 48 R.G.A) in the Lucknow Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad expeditiously say within a period of ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Petition Allowed.
Alert