April 19, 2012

What Brij Mohan Lal Judgement Means to Fast Tract Court Judges?

This is a Landmark Judgement which will be written with Golden Letters in History of Judicial Freedom.

This Brij Moha Lal and other matters in which Supreme Court gave judgement today is popularly known as Fast Track Court Judges.

It happened 10 Years ago when Arun Jately was Law Minister.

He declared a scheme of FAST TRACK COURT JUDGES for FIVE YEARS, which was to be funded by Central Government.

The scheme was challenged before Seven Judge Bench of Supreme Court, on the ground that you cannot appoint anyone AD-HOC Judges for five years? Once they know that their service going to end after 5 Years, will it not corrupt their minds, since after five years, they have no security. You cannot appoint JUDGES on temporary or contract basis.

Seven Judges cleared the scheme with hope that after five years, the Governments will take them in regular posts. This created a LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION for fast track judges that they may be regularized after five years.

The Fast Track Court judges were appointed from lawyers as well as judges. They disposed large number of criminal cases in India.

After FIVE YEARS, Government changed at Centre.

Central Government said, "Game is over". We will not give fund for salaries and expanses for running of Fast Track Courts.
State Governments said, why we should pay salaries to these Judges? Criminal Laws are Central Laws, so Central Government should pay them salaries.

When matter came to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court suggested Central Government to think interest of Institution and be reasonable.

The Central Government became reasonable. It agreed to give Funds for This Scheme for Another Five Years.

Well all were happy for another five years.

THEN WHAT HAPPENED?

After this Five Years were over, the Central Government Said, now we don't want to give any more funds. State Governments said we don't want to pay for central government's baby which had now become 10 years old!

Where will this baby go?

THE BABY CAME TO SUPREME COURT

She complained, "Neither Central Government nor State Governments wants to keep me, where should I go?

CENTRAL GOVERNMENTS ARGUMENTS

1) These Fast Track Judge have no right to continue in service. Their appointment orders were only for five years.

2) Supreme Court cannot direct us to continue a scheme which has expired.

3) Supreme Court cannot give directions which may increase burden of budgets on Central and State Governments.

SUPREME COURT INVOKED ART.142

This Article gives power to Supreme Court to give extra ordinary directions to meet extra ordinary situations/

1) It said in some state, fast track courts are likely to end in 2013 or 2014. There these Fast Track Court will continue till its period.

2) In meantime 10% more courts will be created. The Fast track court judges have legitimate expectation to be absorbed in Judicial Service. An examination (Of Fast Track Judges who were appointed from Bar) will be taken where qualifying marks will be 45%

3)No State shall make any further ad hoc appointments of any new judges till the Fast Track Court Judges who clear above exam are absorbed.

4) This benefit will not be available to those Fast Track Judges who are removed after disciplinary proceedings.

There are many aspects. You have to read actual judgement. The above is what I understood when I was listening to some parts of judgement.

Haresh Raichura

19/4/2012