INDEPENDENT REPORT ON EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

The Empirical Research was conducted regarding the 'Infrastructure and

vacancies in Subordinate Courts'. Our team was allotted the Rohini
District Court , New Delhi. Here is the information inferred from the
Panel Lawyers along with other Law Practitioners working under the
Delhi State Legal Service Authority . Litigants were also a part of the
research.

On reaching Rohini District court , our team approached the President of

the Rohini Court Bar association and he informed us regarding a legal
service committee in operation within the premises of the court under
which retainer / panel lawyers sit in the front office. We approached the
front office and contacted the panel lawyers sitting there. They were
interviewed individually and questionnaires were filled as per the
information provided by them at the same time. They provided insight
into the lack of infrastructure and vacancies and its impact on the
pendency of cases in the Subordinate courts. The lawyers provided their
valuable opinion and information regarding some important issues such
as :

 Establishment of an All India Judicial Service

 National Litigation Policy
 e-court management system
 Should India switch to Inquisitorial system from adversarial
system.
 ISSUES

The issues that our volunteers came up with are :

 Inadequate strength of judges to deal with the number of cases

every day.
 No specified time for witness examination which also
consumes presence of a large amount of police officials in the
courts for the entire day hence acting as a barrier in better
functioning and efficiency of the police force.
 People covering long distances and then spending considerable
time to attend hearing of their case witness delay in the
disposal of the case.
 No awareness regarding the alternate ways of dispute
resolution.
 The Opposition party willfully delaying the case.
 Online and e-court mechanism not effective and feasible for
the common man.
 Lack of Help Desks.
 Transfer of judges is a huge barrier in the speedy disposal of
cases.
 SUGGESTIONS

There were mixed opinions regarding various issues among the

advocates. Some suggested that the introduction of an All India Judicial
Service will bring in Uniformity in the Judicial structure.

The dissenting opinion provided that there are different local , customary
laws in each and every state. Moreover, there is a language barrier which
will prevent speedy and efficient justice.

Majority of advocates were of the opinion that the retirement age for
judges should be increased to 75 years and also vacancies should be
filled by instilling the young generation.

Through visiting numerous advocates found many different ideologies

and about All India Judicial Service, few advocates told about the
difficulty and solutions to that also.

Few litigants were of the opinion that e-courts is a good idea and with
that many expenses which is spent in travelling can be reduced and it is
time effective also.

While many advocates and litigants want more courts in order to reduce
reduce the pendency.

Few advocates gave their opinion that the judge who starts a particular
case should end that case to avoid repetitive hard work by lawyers and
litigants.
 CONCLUSION

India has 19 judges per 10 lakh people on an average, according to a

Law Ministry data which also states that the judiciary faces a combined
shortage of over 6,000 judges, including over 5,000 in the lower courts
itself.

Practically we found this most advocates agree with this view that there
is a shortage of judges and its leads to pendency of cases. Many lawyers
really appreciated the questionnaire.

Advocates discuss various concepts with practical their practical

knowledge and this project provided a huge knowledge with the essence
of practicalities.