Sent from my iPad
Normally Supreme court will refer a case to larger bench if there arises any conflicting decisions from a co-ordinate Bench. Otherwise their is no need to refer any case as a Division bench is competent enough to declare the law within the available limits . So it is totally illegal to refer Teestas Case to larger bench . The small judgment is starting with longest ever sentence in the English language. Here the question is Whether this countries public is still living in middle age? What are the steps taken by our administration to improve this system to prove it is not working in colonial era ?I request every one to go through the link and give their comments .http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/experts-question-sc-order-on-teesta-s-anticipatory-bail-plea-115031901160_1.htmlhttp://freedomteam.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ftilogo-new-300x183.jpg
P. Sureshan,
Advocate-on-record, Supreme Court Of India,
NLC( India ) Law Office
No. 90, Second Floor , Bank Enclave , Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-92..... Ph: 9818083219,7838598740,8802797432,01132081075 ( call time -strictly 4 P.M to 8 P.M on all working days) Extremely sorry if not attended call outside this time limitOn Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Janhit Manch <janhitmanch@gmail.com> wrote:Date : 17-01-2015
SPEED POST
BHAGVANJI RAIYANI
I AM ASHAMED OF OUR JUDICIARY
I AM ASHAMED OF OUR GOVERNMENT
I AM ASHAMED OF OUR PARLIAMENT
To,
1. Hon'ble Shri Pranab Mukherjee
The President of India,
2. Dr.Hamid Ansari
Hon'ble Vice President of India,
3. Mrs.Sumitra Mahajan
Hon'ble Speaker, Loksabha
4. Hon'ble Shri Narendra Modi,
The Prime Minister of India
5. Hon'ble Justice H.L.Dattu
The Chief Justice of India
6. Hon'ble Smt.Sushma Swaraj
Minister for External Affair
7. Hon'ble Shri D.V.Sadananda Gowda
Minister for Law & Justice
Please read The Times of India report dated 17-1-2015 as hereunder, captioned 'Court pendency behind India's low global ranking: World Bank finding: 'Ease of Doing Business'. India was ranked 142 among 189 countries last year. The World Bank suggested that there was an urgent need for reforms in the system of performance appraisal of judicial reforms.
We go on urging for your appointments to discuss judicial reforms but you never care to reply. Now we will be more aggressive (Gandhian ways) an pursuing the mission justice. We will take the issue before the UN and the comity of nations.
I dare you all to sue me if you feel I have defamed institutions or the dignitaries.
(Bhagvanji Raiyani)
Chairman & Managing Trustee
Forum For Fast Justice
09820403912
Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 056.
The Times of India report:
Court pendency behind India's low global ranking: World Bank.
NEW DELHI: Large pendency of cases in Indian courts and non-implementation of judicial reforms have been cited by the World Bank as one of the key reasons for India's low rank on the Bank's Index of 'Ease of Doing Business'. India was ranked 142 among 189 countries last year.
In a memorandum to the department of industrial policy and promotion (DIPP) under the commerce ministry, the World Bank suggested linking judges' appraisal with reduction of pendency in courts. Sources said the matter was discussed at a meeting organized by the DIPP recently to refine the performance evaluation system of judges to link their performance to the resolution of specific bottlenecks as suggested by the World Bank.
The DIPP is also coordinating implementation of the 'Make in India' campaign of the Modi government.
Interestingly, the World Bank suggested that there was an urgent need for reforms in the system of performance appraisal of judicial officers in the country to bring about uniformity and infuse objectivity and standardization.
The Bank cited an example from Malaysia where implementation of a reform index for judges improved case disposal rates and reduced backlog by 50% in less than three years. Another example was cited from the United Arab Emirates, where rewards were instituted for the best performers.
According to the memorandum, the liberal grant of adjournments was an often cited reason for delays in court proceedings in India. It recommended monitoring the number of times judges granted adjournments and the reasons for granting them. "This can be done through case management systems and linked to performance management evaluations," it said.
It asked the government to ensure that adjournments were not indefinite by setting a time limit.
Just a few weeks ago, the Modi government had written to chief justices of all 24 high courts to ensure speedier settlement of commercial and other disputes for creating a conducive investment climate and success of 'Make in India' campaign.
"One of the reforms introduced by Malaysia between 2009 and 2011 during the overhaul of the judicial system was the implementation of a reform index for judges," the Bank said, citing how this index, fixed by the judges themselves, was aimed at allowing them to assess and monitor their performance. As a result of this and other measures, case disposal rates in Malaysian courts improved and backlog was reduced by 50% in less than three years, it said.
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.