Parliamentary panel highlights ‘diversity deficit’ in Supreme Court, High Courts

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, August 9

Highlighting poor representation of Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Women, and Minorities in the Supreme Court and high courts, a parliamentary panel has said the higher judiciary suffered from a “diversity deficit”.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice headed by BJP Rajya Sabha MP Sushil Kumar Modi pointed out that out of 601 high court judges appointed since 2018, only 18, 9 and 32 judges belonged to Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Minorities, while 72 and 91 were from OBC and Women categories, respectively.

While there was no clarity about the category of 13 judges, the rest 457 belonged to the General category, it stated.

“As per the data provided by the Government on the social status of the Judges of the High Courts and otherwise also, it can be seen that our higher judiciary suffers from a ‘diversity deficit’. The representation of SCs, STs, OBCs, Women, and Minorities in the higher judiciary is far below the desired levels and does not reflect the social diversity of the country. In recent years there has been a declining trend in representation from all the marginalized sections of Indian society,” the 133rd Report of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievance, Law and Justice said.

“Though there is no provision for reservation in the judicial appointments at High Courts and Supreme Court level, the Committee feels that adequate representation of various sections of Indian society will further strengthen the trust, credibility, and acceptability of the Judiciary among the citizens,” it stated.

The Committee said that “while making recommendations for appointments to the Higher Judiciary, both the Supreme Court and the High Court’s Collegiums should recommend an adequate number of women and candidates from the marginalized sections of the society including minorities. This provision should be clearly mentioned in the Memoranda of Procedure (MoP), which is presently under finalization.”

Recommending to the Department of Justice to find ways and means to collect such data in respect of all judges presently serving in the Supreme Court and high courts, the panel said, “For doing this, if required, necessary amendments may be brought in the respective Acts/ service rules of the judges.”

To enhance access to justice, it recommended establishing regional benches of the Supreme Court; a comprehensive review of the vacation schedules for both the Supreme Court and High Courts and exploring the possibilities of increasing the retirement age of Supreme Court and high court judges.

“The judiciary, therefore, needs to be sensitized from shutting down courts en masse for a couple of months a year,” it said.

“In this scenario, the Committee is of the view that the suggestion of the former Chief Justice of India Shri RM Lodha on court vacations, that instead of all the judges going on vacation, all at one time, individual judges should take their leave at different times through the year so that the courts are constantly open and there are always benches present to hear cases, should be considered by the Judiciary,” it added.

The panel also recommended mandatory declaration of assets by SC and HC judges; and preparation and publication of annual reports by SC and HCs.