A Venkateswara Rao suggests ways to reduce the delays in our judicial system and ensure senior citizens get justice during their lifetime.
MUMBAI (Daily News & Analysis - Grandeur), August 25, 2006:
It’s a harrowing experience, doing endless rounds of a court hoping for cases to be heard and judgement to be passed. For senior citizens, the denial of justice is doubly painful and can, on occasions, seriously affect their health. It was to clear the backlog of cases in various courts that the President of India had directed the government to resolve delays in appointment to all levels of judiciary.
Issues
The lure of higher rates of interest in some cooperative bank or a seemingly cheap deal at a housing society might snare some seniors into investing their life’s savings unwisely. Such a hasty decision might prove to be the starting point of many of their problems.
Unscrupulous people sometimes occupy influential positions in banks and housing societies and eat away the funds of the investors. It is well known that many senior citizens have died in penury after the South Indian and Charminar cooperative banks shut shop. Others are still visiting courts in the hope of justice.
To cite an incident, some senior citizens of a cooperative housing society who suspected defalcation demanded that the books of accounts be shown to them.
The society, however, turned down their request and branded them non-members though the issue of membership had been settled long ago by the Supreme Court in another case where the same society was a respondent.
Finally, the secretary passed an order inter alia following the Supreme Court order. The society then responded by filing a writ petition in the high court saying that the secretary had no authority to pass the order, though it could not question the order on its merit. An effort was made for an early hearing.
However, the court merely saw the time for which the petition had been pending and kept it aside in preference of earlier cases. The society then refused to repair the elevators in the housing complex to harass the seniors, who were forced to climb several floors.
In these circumstances, the chances of seniors seeing the high court judgement are remote. This is a peculiar case, because the seniors are being denied justice despite a favourable SC order. Also, at this stage, they cannot approach any authority as the matter is sub judice.
Why should senior citizens suffer while a handful of unscrupulous persons take advantage of judicial delays? Why should a covered case be kept pending when the high court or the Supreme Court has already decided the principle?
Recommendations
For a case to come up for final hearing in high court, it has to remain in cold storage for at least two decades. In my opinion, the huge pileup of cases is due to the lack of detailing at the admission stage. This allows unscrupulous litigants to continue their nefarious activities. In the case mentioned above, the judge would not have kept it aside if he had noticed that it was covered by a Supreme Court order.
No doubt it’s difficult to dig out the cases of senior citizens and/or covered cases. For that, the high court can issue a press note inviting “early hearing applications” from persons concerned either as petitioners or respondents and post them for immediate disposal. This will give seniors an opportunity to get justice during their lifetime. In this way, the high court can fulfil its social obligation.
Voices:
“If you are above 55, you can apply for fast-track justice through a letter addressed to the head of the particular judiciary. It doesn’t cost anything. If a case has been pending in the high court, the Chief Justice’s attention can be drawn to it. If it has been pending in a district court, the high court can be moved. Administrative redress can be sought under Article 235 (power of superintendence over all courts by the high court). If that fails to elicit a response, one can file a petition in the high court judicially under Article 226 (power of high courts to issue certain writs) and Article 227 (supplementary to article 226). Alternatively, public-spirited citizens can take up the cause.
-- Justice S M Daud (Retd)
“Why can’t the best legal and political brains of India end the people’s wait for justice on at least a few fundamental issues so important to us?”
-- Sheela Bhatt
Copyright © 2006 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.
August 25, 2006
INDIA: Courting Ways to Cut Wait for Justice for Senior Citizens
A Venkateswara Rao suggests ways to reduce the delays in our judicial system and ensure senior citizens get justice during their lifetime.
MUMBAI (Daily News & Analysis - Grandeur), August 25, 2006:
It’s a harrowing experience, doing endless rounds of a court hoping for cases to be heard and judgement to be passed. For senior citizens, the denial of justice is doubly painful and can, on occasions, seriously affect their health. It was to clear the backlog of cases in various courts that the President of India had directed the government to resolve delays in appointment to all levels of judiciary.
Issues
The lure of higher rates of interest in some cooperative bank or a seemingly cheap deal at a housing society might snare some seniors into investing their life’s savings unwisely. Such a hasty decision might prove to be the starting point of many of their problems.
Unscrupulous people sometimes occupy influential positions in banks and housing societies and eat away the funds of the investors. It is well known that many senior citizens have died in penury after the South Indian and Charminar cooperative banks shut shop. Others are still visiting courts in the hope of justice.
To cite an incident, some senior citizens of a cooperative housing society who suspected defalcation demanded that the books of accounts be shown to them.
The society, however, turned down their request and branded them non-members though the issue of membership had been settled long ago by the Supreme Court in another case where the same society was a respondent.
Finally, the secretary passed an order inter alia following the Supreme Court order. The society then responded by filing a writ petition in the high court saying that the secretary had no authority to pass the order, though it could not question the order on its merit. An effort was made for an early hearing.
However, the court merely saw the time for which the petition had been pending and kept it aside in preference of earlier cases. The society then refused to repair the elevators in the housing complex to harass the seniors, who were forced to climb several floors.
In these circumstances, the chances of seniors seeing the high court judgement are remote. This is a peculiar case, because the seniors are being denied justice despite a favourable SC order. Also, at this stage, they cannot approach any authority as the matter is sub judice.
Why should senior citizens suffer while a handful of unscrupulous persons take advantage of judicial delays? Why should a covered case be kept pending when the high court or the Supreme Court has already decided the principle?
Recommendations
For a case to come up for final hearing in high court, it has to remain in cold storage for at least two decades. In my opinion, the huge pileup of cases is due to the lack of detailing at the admission stage. This allows unscrupulous litigants to continue their nefarious activities. In the case mentioned above, the judge would not have kept it aside if he had noticed that it was covered by a Supreme Court order.
No doubt it’s difficult to dig out the cases of senior citizens and/or covered cases. For that, the high court can issue a press note inviting “early hearing applications” from persons concerned either as petitioners or respondents and post them for immediate disposal. This will give seniors an opportunity to get justice during their lifetime. In this way, the high court can fulfil its social obligation.
Voices:
“If you are above 55, you can apply for fast-track justice through a letter addressed to the head of the particular judiciary. It doesn’t cost anything. If a case has been pending in the high court, the Chief Justice’s attention can be drawn to it. If it has been pending in a district court, the high court can be moved. Administrative redress can be sought under Article 235 (power of superintendence over all courts by the high court). If that fails to elicit a response, one can file a petition in the high court judicially under Article 226 (power of high courts to issue certain writs) and Article 227 (supplementary to article 226). Alternatively, public-spirited citizens can take up the cause.
-- Justice S M Daud (Retd)
“Why can’t the best legal and political brains of India end the people’s wait for justice on at least a few fundamental issues so important to us?”
-- Sheela Bhatt
Copyright © 2006 Diligent Media Corporation Ltd.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment