LOK PRAHARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the judgment and order dtd. 20/4/2021, this Court refers to the unprecedented situation arising from the backlog of cases pending before the High Courts, and that any Constitution has to be dynamic as to sub-serve and endeavour to serve an existing problem. Secondly, the judgment and order dtd. 20/4/2021 states that it would not be appropriate to close the proceedings, but a concept of continuing mandamus would be appropriate to work out the recourse to Article 224A of the Constitution of India.

(2.) As per the National Judicial Data Grid, recent data indicates that there has been an increase in pendency levels in almost all the High Courts. Around 62,00,000 (Sixty Two Lakhs) cases are pending before the High Courts in India as on 25/1/2025, of which more than 18,20,000 (Eighteen Lakhs Twenty Thousands) cases are criminal cases and more than 44,00,000 (Forty Lakhs) cases are civil cases.

(3.) Having regard to the aforesaid position, we are inclined to keep the observations/conditions stipulated in paragraphs 43, 50, 54 and 55 of the judgment and order dtd. 20/4/2021 that recourse to the appointment of ad-hoc Judges under Article 224A of the Constitution of India should not be made unless 80% of the sanctioned strength is already either recommended or working, in abeyance. In other words, the requirement that the vacancies should not be more than 20% of the sanctioned strength, will be kept in abeyance for the time being.