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.
Legal Services India

» Home
Friday, June 19, 2026

West UP High Court Bench Demand: 80 Years of Judicial Discrimination, Article 14 Concerns and Centre’s Accountability

Posted in: Judiciary
Tue, Jun 16, 26, 04:24, 3 Days ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 21727
West UP's demand for a High Court Bench highlights judicial inequality, Article 14 concerns, case backlog, and Centre's prolonged delay.

Most Autocratic Denial of High Court Bench to West UP

It is not democratic but is most autocratic that the most populated State of India that is Uttar Pradesh which has maximum number of pending cases among all States even after partition of Uttar Pradesh in November 2000 and still has just one High Court Bench in Lucknow so close to Allahabad High Court for just few districts and nowhere else which is absolutely unbelievable and West UP despite owing for majority of pending cases of Allahabad High Court being denied even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench is most autocratic denial of a High Court Bench to West UP for 80 years after India became independent in 1947 and as if this was not enough attached litigants of 30 districts of West UP with not even Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice which is most baffling indeed!

Worst of all, even when UP was undivided then also the litigants of hilly areas of undivided UP had to travel most astoundingly thousands of kilometers all the way till Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest betrayal of Constitution which stands for equality as fundamental right as envisaged in Article 14 of Constitution, biggest burial of justice and worst mockery of poorest litigants of hilly areas of undivided UP which ultimately led to huge agitations and many people sacrificed their precious lives and then separate Statehood itself and separate High Court for hilly areas of undivided UP which as long as it formed part of undivided UP did not have even a single Bench not even a Circuit Bench even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself recommended two Circuit Benches at Dehradun and Nainital and a permanent Bench in West UP in Agra yet not one created and Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji was given one more at Aurangabad in 1980s as recommended and now last year on August 18, 2025 we saw fifth High Court Bench created at Kolhapur for just 6 districts started functioning!

Most chillingly, even the Supreme Court never dared to take suo motu cognizance of it and press which is considered the fourth pillar of Indian democracy also maintained a conspicuous deafening silence on it and hardly ever accorded prime coverage to it!

Centre Biggest Stumbling Block for West UP Bench

The point being made here is that it is Centre which most unscrupulously has been acting as the biggest stumbling block for creation of High Court Bench in West UP on one pretext or the other which has only served to portray it in poor light. Centre’s decision to deprive West UP from having even a single High Court Bench is bereft of any logic.

For the exclusive benefit and indulgence of my esteemed readers, let me now lay bare that Uttar Pradesh falls in how many regions or economic divisions and districts included in them. They are as follows:-

Uttar Pradesh Regions and Districts

Division Region Name Number of Districts
Western Division Paschimanchal 30
Central Division Madhyanchal 10
Bundelkhand Division Bundelkhand 7
Eastern Division Purvanchal 28

Western Division (Paschimanchal – 30 Districts)

  • Saharanpur
  • Muzaffarnagar
  • Bijnor
  • Rampur
  • Budaun
  • Mathura
  • Etah
  • Bareilly
  • Pilibhit
  • Shahjahanpur
  • Firozabad
  • Agra
  • Mainpuri
  • Baghpat
  • Meerut
  • Amroha
  • Moradabad
  • Gautam Buddha Nagar
  • Ghaziabad
  • Bulandshahr
  • Hathras
  • Aligarh
  • Kannauj
  • Farrukhabad
  • Auraiya
  • Etawah
  • Kasganj
  • Hapur
  • Sambhal
  • Shamli

Central Division (Madhyanchal – 10 Districts)

  • Lakhimpur Kheri
  • Hardoi
  • Sitapur
  • Barabanki
  • Lucknow
  • Unnao
  • Rae Bareli
  • Kanpur Dehat
  • Kanpur Nagar
  • Fatehpur

Bundelkhand Division (7 Districts)

  • Mahoba
  • Hamirpur
  • Chitrakoot
  • Banda
  • Jalaun
  • Jhansi
  • Lalitpur

Eastern Division (Purvanchal – 28 Districts)

  • Ambedkar Nagar
  • Ayodhya
  • Siddharthnagar
  • Basti
  • Maharajganj
  • Gorakhpur
  • Kushinagar
  • Deoria
  • Mau
  • Azamgarh
  • Ballia
  • Bhadohi
  • Varanasi
  • Jaunpur
  • Sonbhadra
  • Mirzapur
  • Kaushambi
  • Prayagraj
  • Balrampur
  • Gonda
  • Chandauli
  • Shravasti
  • Bahraich
  • Sant Kabir Nagar
  • Sultanpur
  • Ghazipur
  • Pratapgarh
  • Amethi

Source Reference

(Source: Sam Samayik Ghatna Chakra Uttar Pradesh At A Glance 2026 on page 81 published from Allahabad)

Centre: Biggest Stumbling Block for High Court Bench in West UP

The point being made here is that it is Centre which most unscrupulously has been acting as the biggest stumbling block for creation of High Court Bench in West UP on one pretext or the other which has only served to portray it in poor light. It is also not hidden from anyone that it is Centre which is the biggest litigator in our nation!

For my esteemed readers exclusive indulgence, I must bring out here that the Single Judge Bench of Allahabad High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Kshitij Shailendra in a most notable judgment titled Radhey Shyam Yadav vs Sri Ashok Nath Tiwari, the District Inspector of Schools in Contempt Application (Civil) No. - 6468 of 2022 that was pronounced recently on May 19, 2026 laments in para 20 with a heavy heart stating that,

“In heavily burdened constitutional courts, like our Allahabad High Court, where around 400, 500, 600 and sometimes more than 800 cases are listed every day before every Judge, judicial proceedings may consume considerable time for disposal; sometimes years and sometime decades also. Still people all around may expect such overburdened judges to become ever-working super robots or super computers or super-human beings? If during such pendency, parties are permitted to openly defy operative directions, the administration of justice would descend into chaos and anarchy. The law does not countenance such audacity.”

Absolutely right! Why more than half of Judges seat even in Allahabad High Court keep lying vacant when we now see that in Supreme Court Judges strength has been increased and all vacancies have also been filled?

Justice (Retd) Markandey Katju Supports West UP Bench Demand

Even former eminent Supreme Court Judge – Justice (Retd) Markandey Katju who has been Chief Justice of different High Courts including Allahabad High Court has fully reiterated his open support to the most legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is most refreshing to note!

How long will this most pressing Bench issue in West UP be held hostage on one pretext or the other? How long will Centre be seen to be sitting on the fence on this most compelling issue?

Justice Jaswant Singh Commission Recommendation and Centre's Delay

By any reckoning, Centre needs to remove the albatross from around its neck of West UP cannot have a High Court Bench despite so deserving as was recommended also by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge appointed by Centre itself who recommended a permanent seat of High Court Bench in West UP about 50 years ago yet not even a single High Court Circuit Bench created in last about 80 years of independence since 1947!

How long will Centre feel the luxury to keep such a most pressing issue directly affecting the litigants of 30 districts of West UP in abeyance on one pretext or the other? How long will such a long lingering most pressing issue remain in limbo needlessly and pale into insignificance at the cost of litigants of West UP who suffer most especially those who are very poor?

Key Issues Highlighted

Issue Observation
High Court Bench in West UP Demand remains pending despite longstanding recommendations.
Allahabad High Court Burden Judges handle hundreds of cases daily, causing delays.
Vacant Judicial Posts Many judges' seats reportedly remain vacant.
Justice Jaswant Singh Commission Recommended a permanent Bench in West UP nearly 50 years ago.
Litigants of 30 Districts Continue to face hardships due to the absence of a Bench.

Major Questions Raised

  • Why does more than half of Judges seat in Allahabad High Court continue to remain vacant?
  • How long will the demand for a High Court Bench in West UP remain pending?
  • Why has the recommendation of the Justice Jaswant Singh Commission not been implemented?
  • How long will litigants from 30 districts of West UP continue to suffer due to the absence of a Bench?
  • Why has not even a single High Court Circuit Bench been created in West UP since Independence?

Centre Accountability for West UP High Court Bench

Truly speaking, the prominent view is that Centre is fully culpable for depriving West UP from having even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench just like in Purvanchal and Bundelkhand! Centre needs to think hard and deep that why it has so irrationally deprived West UP from having even a single Bench? How long will Centre keep appeasing naysayers who most vehemently oppose the setting up of even a single Bench in West UP for serving their own vested interests? Denial of even a single High Court Bench to West UP on flimsy grounds is patently ludicrous and absolutely unbelievable!

Implementation of Law Commission Recommendations

It must be asked: Why 230th Report of Law Commission of India which recommended creation of High Court Benches in different States not implemented even after 17 years of its recommendation? High Court Benches are the life blood of democracy for providing justice to people at doorsteps yet only five elite States have multiple High Court Benches! This is the real rub!

Key Concerns Raised

  • Non-implementation of the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India.
  • Lack of a High Court Bench in West UP despite long-standing demands.
  • Unequal distribution of High Court Benches across States.
  • Limited public debate on the issue at the national level.

Role of Apex Court and National Media

Plainly speaking, it must be asked: Why Apex Court has never held Centre accountable for it? Why national news channels never debate on it? Why most of national newspapers never publish any editorial on this hot-button issue which will portray Centre in poor spotlight as it is primarily culpable for this most atrocious discrimination perpetrated with impunity by not doing anything worthwhile to end it or even contain it?

It is gut wrenching to see how national media has never deemed it fit to ever highlight it nationally and kept mollycoddling Centre most shamelessly by giving it no space anywhere not even in the margins!

Demand for Suo Motu Cognizance

Let me put it this way: It is high time that Apex Court takes suo motu cognizance of this most third rated merciless discrimination and hold Centre accountable for it!

Why only five elite States – Maharashtra, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Assam and West Bengal have multiple High Court Benches and on what basis? Except Maharashtra, the population of all States which have multiple High Court Benches is less than even West UP and still deprived from having even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench! What is happening in our country?

States With Multiple High Court Benches Mentioned

State Status Mentioned
Maharashtra Multiple High Court Benches
Karnataka Multiple High Court Benches
Madhya Pradesh Multiple High Court Benches
Assam Multiple High Court Benches
West Bengal Multiple High Court Benches
West UP No High Court Bench or Circuit Bench

Constitutional Duty of Centre

To sum it up, Centre has to deliver now! The central question here is: How can Centre abdicate its constitutional duty to ensure that the worst discrimination that has been perpetrated in distribution of High Court Benches in different States and different regions is brought to an end altogether?

How can Apex Court also refuse to take suo motu cognizance of it which directly pertains to judiciary itself?

Article 14 and Right to Equality

All told, there is absolutely just no doubt that our highest court has mostly always stood up for its citizens and upheld the Constitution. One fondly hopes that Apex Court will take suo motu cognizance of it at the earliest as it is a blatant violation of Article 14 of Constitution which envisages right to equality as a fundamental right yet most unfortunately on this count lies in tatters!

Main Points of Objection

  • West UP continues to be deprived of a High Court Bench.
  • No Circuit Bench has been established for the region.
  • The issue is presented as a violation of the principle of equality under Article 14.
  • There is a call for judicial and governmental intervention.

My objection against Centre’s discriminatory approach stands and shall always stand as long as Centre does not end its dead determination of depriving West UP from having even a single High Court Bench not even a Circuit Bench!

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

Legal Services India

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 19, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Rahendra Baglari v. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M) writ petitioner for adjoining a Judicial Magistrate and the High Court and its Registry as Respondents to his plea against the order passed by the said Magistrate.
Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal vs.Uttarakhand long standing or established status quo brought about by judgments interpreting local or state laws, should not be lightly departed from.
Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur apart from High Court at Mumbai but on the contrary UP which has maximum pending cases in India
It is most shocking to see that a peaceful, one of the most developed and most prosperous state like Maharashtra has 4 high court benches at Panaji, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Kolhapur
I am neither a member nor supporter of BJP or any other political party nor a member of any of BJP's affiliated organizations like the RSS or VHP or any other organization.
Kirti vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited advocates cannot throw away legal rights or enter into arrangements contrary to law. It was also made clear that any concession in law made in this regard by either counsel would not bind the parties.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on December 28, 2020 had expressed shock and deep concern on the arbitrary, illegal and brazen exercise of brute power by the police against lawyers, including the search conducted at the premises of an advocate representing some of the accused in the North-East Delhi riots cases.
media trial during criminal investigation interferes with administration of justice and hence amounts to contempt of court as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Jamal v. Maharashtra dismissed a plea filed by the National President of BJP Minority Morcha – Jamal Anwar Siddiqui seeking 'X' category security.
Duroply Industries Limited and anr. Vs Ma Mansa Enterprises Private Limited in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction has recalled its own order of an injunction passed in a trademark dispute as the Judge presiding over the case had appeared for one party in respect of the same trademark in the past.
At the outset, it must be stated rather disconcertingly that it is India's misfortune that UP which has the maximum population more than 23 crore as Yogi Adityanath
At the outset, it has to be stated without mincing any words that it merits no reiteration that Judges age for retirement must be now increased to 75
Rajeev Bhardwaj v. H.P while dismissing a plea seeking a declaration of a sitting Judge's dissenting view as Coram non-judice and non est in the eyes of law.
Adv KG Suresh vs UOI has declared as unconstitutional the bar on lawyers representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals constituted under the Maintenance Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (Maintenance Act).
Bar Council of India ensured that there is an entrance exam now for all those lawyers who want to practice which has to be cleared before lawyers can start practicing.
It is a matter of grave concern that while our Constitution enshrines the right to equality as postulated in Article 14 but in practice what we witness is just the reverse.
seeking interim bail/parole for the under-privileged and under-trial prisoners/convicts keeping in view the terrible havoc unleashed by the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic.
When an intellectual giant like Fali Sam Nariman whom I personally rate as the world's top jurist and it is not just me but his extremely impeccable credentials are acknowledged in legal field, it is not just India but the whole world which listens to him in silence
Treasa Josfine vs Kerala that a woman who is fully qualified cannot be denied of her right to be considered for employment on the ground that she is a woman and because the nature of the employment would require her to work during night hours.
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs constituted a Committee to suggest reforms in our criminal justice system which has been facing repeated criticism for its various drawbacks
Congress government's rule in Centre, Kapil Sibal who was Union Law Minister had written very categorically to UP Government for creating a high court bench for West UP at Meerut
completely about the truthfulness of the retracted confession and should corroborate his/her confession as it is unsafe to convict an accused person solely on the basis of the retracted confession
Thabir Sagar vs Odisha the practice of Advocate's clerks filing affidavits on behalf of parties is unacceptable. Such a practice is in gross violation of Rule 26 of the Orissa High Court Rules. It has therefore rightly directed its Registry to ensure that steps are taken forthwith to stop the practice of accepting such affidavits
COVID situation in UP, the Allahabad High Court has issued revised fresh guidelines for the functioning of all the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it.
amended its rules to make criticism and attack of Bar Council decisions by members a misconduct and ground for disqualification or suspension or removal of membership of a member from the Bar Council.
CJI NV Ramana who was appointed as the 48th CJI on 6th April, 2021 and took oath as CJI on 24th April 2021 has very rightly expressed his concern on the social media noise and how it adversely impacts the institutions also like judiciary to a great extent which actually should not be the case.
At the crucial meeting of the Central Action Committee. of more than 20 districts of Bar Association of West UP held at Aligarh
Why UP which is among the largest States, has maximum population more than 24 crore which is more than even Pakistan
When finances are needed for the purpose of improving the judicial system at the lower levels, there is reluctance to make such finances available.
rarely ever booked and made to face the consequences which only serves to further encourage men in uniform to take it for granted to indulge in worst custodial torture
Tarun Saxena vs Union of India as ultra vires Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which bars lawyers from representing parties in matters before the Maintenance Tribunals
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand was mowed down by an autorickshaw has sent shivers down the spine. The ghastly incident happened on morning of July 28 near the Magistrate colony of Dhanbad that was close to the Judge's residence.
Suman Chadha & Anr. vs. Central Bank of India in that the wilful breach of the undertaking given to the Court can amount to Contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Rajasthan High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts 2020 which shall be applicable to the proceeding of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and all the Subordinate Courts of the Rajasthan with immediate effect.
Arun Singh Chauhan v/s MP deprecate the conduct of a practicing advocate who chose not to answer the repeated queries of the Court pertaining to the maintainability of his petition seeking issuance of a writ of quo warranto and regarding the non-impleadment of a necessary party
Dr.Mukut Nath Verma vs UoI Allahabad High Court imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on an advocate Dr Mukut Nath Verma after concluding that he unauthorisedly filed a writ petition on behalf of suspended and absconding IPS officer Mani Lal Patidar and also levelled serious allegations against state authorities and thereby misleading the Court.
Anil JS vs Kerala that instances of allegations about the police disrespecting the citizens were arriving at its doors with alarming regularity and therefore issued certain general directions in its judgment.
If there is one Judge on whom I have blind faith for his exemplary conduct throughout his brilliant career and who can never favour wrongly even his own son
Indianisation of our legal system is the need of the hour and it is crucial to make the justice delivery system more accessible and effective.
the gang war of different gangs have now reached right up to the court premises itself which are supposed to be the holiest shrines for getting justice.
It is not just for enjoying life or going for some holiday trip that lawyers of West UP repeatedly keep going on strike since last many decades.
CM Yogi Adityanath UP has progressed by leaps and bounds which one certainly cannot deny but why is it that it has just one High Court Bench only and that too just approximately 200 km away at the city famously called Nawab City
Just changing name of Allahabad to Prayagraj won't change the ground reality. It is a proven fact that High Court is still called Allahabad High Court and not Prayagraj High Court.
It is most shocking that all the Chief Justices of India from 1947 till 2000 were never shocked nor were any world famous jurist like Nani Ardeshir Palkhiwala, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan among many others
Raggu Baniya @ Raghwendra vs UP has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to instruct the District Magistrates of all the districts to re-evaluate the cases for remission after 14 years of incarceration even if appeals in such cases are pending in the High Court.
Union Minister of State for Law and Justice – SP Singh Baghel who is also an MP from Agra again in Western UP and who just recently took over has made it clear that his ministry was open to the setting up of a Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Western UP.
Anil Kumar and Anr. Vs Amit that the practice of advocates acting as power of attorney holders of their clients and also as advocates in the matter, is contrary to the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Shashank Singh vs/ Honourable High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that under Article 233 of the Constitution of India, a Judicial Officer regardless of his or her previous experience, as an Advocate, cannot apply and compete for appointment to any vacancy in the post of District Judge.
It must be stated at the very outset that it is quite bewildering and baffling to see that the state of UP which Ban ki moon who is the former UN Secretary General had slammed as the rape and crime capital of India
most powerfully raised vocally the legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP which is the crying need of the hour also.
Top