Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Wednesday, May 8, 2024

Why Statehood For Telangana But Not Even Bench For West UP?

Posted in: General Practice
Tue, Oct 31, 23, 16:10, 7 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 8197
UPA approved Statehood for Telangana with just 3.5 crore population but did not approve even a single High Court Bench

It is truly incomprehensible as to why UPA approved Statehood for Telangana with just 3.5 crore population but did not approve even a single High Court Bench for West UP even though the lawyers of West UP and that too senior lawyers comprising of President and General Secretary of Meerut Bar who leads the Central Action Committee comprising of 22 districts of West UP which was formed in 1981 to relentlessly pursue the sacred agitation for a High Court Bench repeatedly submitted memorandum to the top leaders of the Congress like Ms Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, former PM Dr Manmohan Singh and many others in support of the legitimate and compelling demand for a High Court Bench in West UP?

The population of West UP is about 10 crore and still not even a single High Court Bench is being approved here due to which the litigants of 30 districts of West UP are compelled to travel whole night and half day all the way right uptill not even Lucknow which has a High Court Bench and which falls more than 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice! It was however in the tenure of PM Shri Narendra Modi that Telangana came into existence on June 2, 2014.

I can’t make a head or tail of it as to why Lucknow which is so near to Allahabad has Bench since 1948 and West UP even after 77 years of independence has none and worst of all the litigants of West UP attached not even with Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice? When Centre can amend the penal laws made by Britishers as we saw recently then why can’t Centre also amend the most stupid decision taken by Centre in 1948 to create a single High Court for the most populated State of India at Lucknow only and not a single for Western UP even though more than half of the pending cases are from West UP? How long will Centre keep ducking the all-important Bench issue in West UP?

I have just no doubt in my mind, not even an iota of doubt that denying most mercilessly even a single High Court Bench to West UP and attaching the litigants of West UP not even with Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad is the worst travesty of justice and is the most egregious violation of Article 14 of Constitution which promises right to equality as a fundamental right to all citizens of India!

The creation of a Bench in West UP is bound to bring about a paradigm shift in the criminal justice delivery system by making it easily available at doorsteps thus making it more fair, efficient and responsive to the needs of the people. The central problem here is: Centre is just not ready to budge on Bench issue which I find most perplexing. Why can’t Centre be more flexible on setting up of more High Court Benches in UP?

Why even e-filing facility which was approved and in Meerut was to start from November 1, 2023 but that also has been given a red signal by the Allahabad High Court? Why a very powerful lobby is allowed to have the last laugh and why the litigants of West UP have to travel whole night and half day right uptill Allahabad to seek justice?

Suffice it to say: Supreme Court which is the last ray of hope for the people must at least now intervene and should have the guts, gall and gumption to differ with the famous old adage that, “Might is right” and should not restrain itself in speaking out most vocally that how can the most populated State of India with maximum pending cases have just one Bench only when other States with far lesser pending cases and lesser population like Maharashtra, Assam, Karnataka, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh can have multiple High Court Benches and here too why West UP which owes for more than half of the total number of pending cases has none?

Why the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India prepared by the eminent legal luminary and former Supreme Court Judge late Dr AR Lakshmanan advocating for creation of more High Court Benches has not been uniformly implemented even after 14 years after its historic recommendations having been submitted and why only very few States have multiple High Court Benches even though the crime rate in those States is very low as compared to States like UP and Rajasthan which have just one Bench and lawless Bihar where there is none? This burning issue cannot be kept in the backburner any longer!

The most ticklish question to consider here is: Why other states where pending cases in High Courts didn’t exceed even one lakh were given more Benches and which already had Benches like Maharashtra, Karnataka and Assam among others but UP was not given even a single more Bench after 1948? Why UP has more than 10 lakh pending cases in High Court and nearly one crore cases in lower courts which is more than half of the states cases put together and still it has just one High Court Bench and that too so close to Allahabad?

Why Centre has most contemptuously refused to create even a single High Court Bench in any nook and corner of UP including at West UP which has 30 districts? Why so many former PMs like Atal Bihari Vajpayee who raised the demand for a Bench for West UP at Meerut right inside Parliament in 1986, Mrs Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Dr Manmohan Singh among others had all appreciated the dire need for a High Court Bench in West UP yet not even a single was created anywhere in UP? Why another lawless state Bihar has not even a single High Court Bench? Why so many UP CM like Dr Sampoornanand, ND Tiwari, Rajnath Singh supported the demand for Bench in West UP still none?

Let me say this with a sense of responsibility: Centre is definitely complicit in doing its best to ensure that open partiality is done by approving Statehood itself for Telangana with just 3.5 crore population and on the contrary we see that for West Uttar Pradesh even a single High Court Bench is not being approved as recommended by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge.

Denying even a single High Court Bench to West UP is an out and out cheating with the more than 10 crore people living here for which Centre is definitely fully culpable and this open cheating cannot be ever condoned under any circumstances! The reasons forwarded for denying a Bench in West UP are absolutely freakish!

One still hopes that there is a modicum of realization in Centre that a High Court Bench in West UP is the crying need of the hour and its denial has compelled the litigants to travel whole night and half day in just travelling alone all the way not even till Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice!

Denial of a Bench has an adverse and devastating impact on the litigants which culminates in dooming the very justice delivery system of the country which alone explains why the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India very strongly recommended the creation of more High Court Benches but 14 years down the lane, it still lies unimplemented! Why has Centre so completely messed up in UP by not allowing even a single High Court Bench in whole of UP other than at Lucknow?

Still more loathsome is to see how Centre has most contemptuously snubbed the more than 75 years old demand for a Bench in West UP! Why is it that only for southern States like Karnataka we see multiple High Court Benches being created at a lightening speed as in 2008 we saw for just 4 and 8 districts at Dharwad and Gulbarga two Benches were created so promptly? Why for Telangana with just 3.5 crore population was conferred Statehood at a bullet train pace?

Why the same promptness is never shown for Uttar Pradesh where lawyers are agitating since so many decades yet no Bench created since 1948 till now and so also in Bihar where there is not even a single Bench and so also in Rajasthan where there is again just one Bench at Jaipur only? This is the nub of the matter!

Why is it that Centre can make cosmetic changes like changing name associated with Pandit Jawaharlal Nehruji but can never change what? His most stupid decision to create a single High Court Bench for whole of Uttar Pradesh and attaching the litigants of 30 districts of West UP not even with Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad which means more than 230 km away from even Lucknow due to which whole night and half day wasted on just travelling alone and since last 77 years we see no change made in this most absurd decision!

Dr Satyapal Singh who is former Mumbai Police Commissioner and former Union Minister and also MP from Baghpat had demanded five High Court Benches for Uttar Pradesh at Meerut, Agra, Jhansi, Varanasi which is the constituency of PM Mr Narendra Modi and at Gorakhpur which is constituency of CM Mr Yogi Adityanath and who himself in Parliament demanded Bench and even brought forth a Private Members Bill then why we see no action taken by Centre on this count?

Why Centre has always chosen to ride roughshod over the genuine, compelling and legitimate aspirations for people of different regions of Uttar Pradesh for a High Court Bench like West UP with population of 10 crore and for Telangana Statehood is conferred nearly ten years back for just about 3 or 3.5 crore people? Of course, Centre must now definitely shun this region and State based discrimination which our Constitution is so deadly opposed to yet we most unfortunately witness such raw discrimination being perpetrated on ground most openly with impunity most senselessly!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
India is going on grate path of welfare-state. Mahatma Gandhi's greatest ambition for India was to wipe every tear from every eye
Social justice means a way of life with liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life.
BJP after always repeatedly assuring the lawyers of West UP that they will make sure that a high court bench is created soon here as soon as it comes to power has reneged on its tall promises and has done virtually nothing on this score till now
To start with, I say this not as a lawyer of West UP but as a good citizen of India that the unending protest of lawyers of West UP severely affects the litigants who have to wait repeatedly to get justice. But who is responsible for this
It is most baffling to note that Centre since 1947 till 2018 has consistently, callously, blatantly and brazenly disregarded the numerous hardships faced by the more than 9 crore people of West UP in travelling nearly 700 to 750 km
Uttarakhand High Court in the landmark case of Lalit Kumar v Union of India & Ors in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 203 of 2014 dated 12 June 2018 directed the Centre to establish a Regional Bench of Armed Forces Tribunal in the State of Uttarakhand within four months.
West UP which deserved statehood right since 1947 has not even a single bench of a high court since last more than 70 years
High Court of Kerala has in a historic move directed the Indian Railways to treat identity cards issued to lawyers by respective Bar Councils as a valid identity proof to undertake a train journey/travel.
Constitution of Special District Courts to try cases as per the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Foreign law Firms cannot Practice in India, but they are free to give legal advice regarding foreign law on diverse international legal issues on a fly in and fly out basis if it does not amount to practice.
Each and every person who is humane whether he/she is Indian or Pakistani or anyone else is overjoyed on learning the news of the release of Abhinandan
crime against women are multiplying most rapidly in UP and this is most felt in West UP which is the worst affected of all the regions of UP.
In our country around 5 lakh accidents take place every year and 1.5 lakh deaths occur. In world highest number of deaths due to the accidents take place in India. It is our responsibility to control these deaths and promote road safety.
It was decided unanimously by all the lawyers of 22 districts of West UP to go on strike on November 25, 2019 and observe it as  protest day. The lawyers of West UP are not happy with the statement of Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad about the creation of a high court bench in West UP
parents of a married son are not entitled to claim filial compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Rambabu Singh Thakur v/s Sunil Arora serious note of the increase in the number of tainted candidates facing criminal cases entering politics. It has issued a slew of directions in this latest, landmark and extremely laudable judgment which we shall discuss later.
J&K High Court Bar Association v. UOI dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought prohibition of use of pellet guns. How long can security forces restrain themselves if public becomes unruly and start pelting stones, bottles and what not
Harmanbhai Umedbhai Patel vs Bindu Kumar Mohanlal Shahupheld an order passed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) dismissing a complaint alleging professional misconduct by a lawyer. There was no professional misconduct found on the part of the lawyer.
Kangana Ranaut vs Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai restraining the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai from carrying out any further demolition at Kangana Ranaut's residence in Bandra
The Telangana Fire Works Dealers Association vs. P Indra Prakash has modified the order of the Telangana High Court which imposed a complete and immediate ban on the sale and use of firecrackers across the state during Diwali to fall in line with the directions imposed by the National Green Tribunal on November 9
The non-availability of birth certificate is issued when the person does not have a birth proof. One can visit the municipal corporation, gram panchayat or chief medical officer in the area where he or she is born and apply for this document, showing address proof and proofs of 2 more witnesses on an affidavit.
M. Thangaraj (Ex. MC) v. The District Collector, Dindigul to follow the ritual of taking a procession around the temple (Girivalam) has recently on January 18, 2021 observed that all the religious processions should spread positivity and brotherhood and in no manner should be a cause for any communal disturbance.
K Raju v. UOI only senior citizens/parents are entitled to file an appeal against an order passed by the Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007.
Kolkata Municipal Corporation authorities to take action against people found slaughtering cattle including cows and/or exhibiting for sale flesh of slaughtered cattle and/or selling cattle meat.
Legal Industry and the Enhancement of the Technology Towards the Progressive Development In An Amicable Manner
Omnarayan Sharma Vs MP issued directions to the District Legal Services Authorities and the State Authority for ensuring implementation of poverty alleviation schemes promulgated under provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 and NALSA
Javed v Uttar Pradesh that the cow should be declared the national animal and cow protection should be made a fundamental right of the Hindus because we know that when the country's culture and its faith get hurt, the country becomes weak.
The ‘Green Channel’ is an automated and transparent system for gaining approval for certain type and combination of mergers and acquisition.
Hasae @ Hasana Wae vs UP that dilution of constitutional autonomy of the High Courts would threaten the concept of judicial federalism envisaged in the Constitution and affirmed by judicial precedents.
Madhya Pradesh vs Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti that the presiding deity of the temple is the owner of the land attached to the temple and Pujari is only to perform puja and to maintain the properties of the deity.
Alkesh Vs MP in a case under SC/ST Act, the caste of the complainant is of paramount importance and is a sine qua non and that it can't be assumed that the complainant would forget to mention in the FIR that the assailants had made aspersions against his caste.
The non-availability of birth certificate is a document to register unregistered birth. It can also be used in case the applicant has lost his birth certificate to a fire, flood or any other reason.
a Dalit man named Lakhbir Singh aged 35 years who was a food server with no political affiliation of any kind or any past criminal record would first be beaten black
Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Kapil Sibal states The whole Act is an attempt to aggrandize the power of the State.
Char Dham Highway expansion in full court room exchange took the extremely commendable, clear, cogent, composed, courageous and convincing stand that concerns of defence forces cannot be overridden.
Bindu v. Allahabad that as per Article 233(2), a person seeking appointment as a District Judge must be practicing as an advocate for continuous 7 years (without any break) on the date of application.
TC Gupta v. UOI that the petitioner-advocate who in more than one matters, has indulged in filing Original Applications in the Tribunal as well as writ petitions in the High Court and has personally signed the pleadings etc without having been specifically authorized in this regard by the litigants which cannot be glossed over.
Swaran Kaur vs Punjab that entitlement for the grant of family pension to the dependent parents needs to be seen after the widow or the children loose their eligibility for the grant of the said benefit.
Zubair Ahmed Teli Vs. Union Territory of J&K that there is no requirement of prior consideration of the social investigation report by Juvenile Justice Board while considering a bail plea under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act,
Chandrashekhar R vs Karnataka that Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution embodies the principle of religious tolerance which is a characteristic of Indian civilization disposed of a public interest litigation alleging that the contents of Azan
Suresh Kumar vs CP upholding the dismissal of a police head constable who was caught with 75 dirhams while on duty of checking passengers passports of the Indira Gandhi International Airport in 1996, observing that the police officers who break law must be dealt with iron hands.
Mohd Abdul Khaliq Vs UP that the Central Government would take the request appropriate decision to ban cow slaughter in the country and to declare the same as a protected national animal.
Nikhil Singh Vs UOI that: As would be evident from the chart supplied by Dr KN Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, most of the Airports/Airstrips in the State of Bihar are non-functional.
While striking entirely the right chord as the lawyers anticipated also, we saw how just recently it was none other than the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Dr Adish C Aggarwala who recently got elected as President after surpassing many of his strong competitors with most strongest being Mr Dushyant Dave
Al Tawaf Hajj And Umrah Travel And Tourism vs UoI that: Haj Pilgrimage and the ceremonies involved therein and the ceremonies involved therein fall within the ambit of a religious practice, which is protected by the Constitution of India.
It is ‘shockingly bizarre’ that UP has maximum pending cases among all States that is more than 10 lakhs in High Courts and about a crore in lower courts and has maximum population
South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs BN Magon that an advocate’s office run from a residential building is not subject to property tax under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act as a business building.
Meena Pradhan vs Kamla Pradhan that a will is required to fulfill all the formalities required under Section 63 of the Succession Act.
Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much, recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man/woman
Top