AJRI Suggests CJI & SC Judges Turning COVID-19 Pandemic into A Blessing in Disguise

To,                                                                                                        19/05/2020

                       Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde,

                                 The Chief Justice of India,

                                              New Delhi.

Subject:  Suggestions for turning COVID-19 Pandemic into a blessing in disguise for Indian Justice Delivery System.

  Reference to the subject mentioned above, we on the behalf of our trust the Association for Judicial Reforms, India (AJRI), want to humbly submit the following submissions for kind consideration of lordship for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary during Covid-19 Pandemic:                                                                                                    

1.    That our Trust, Association for Judicial Reforms ,India (AJRI) is working for the cause of Judicial Reforms by suggesting practical ways to all the stakeholders of Justice Delivery System based on public experiences and analytical legal researches.

2.    That as our Trust believes that evolution of present Judicial system within its jurisdictions is the best suited methodology to bring judicial reforms in India, we at AJRI work for documenting the public experiences of litigants/lawyers and synergize these with analytical researches carried out by our researchers, to suggest only those practical ways, which if implemented in accordance with the present Constitutional/Statutory provisions will bring valuable reforms in the present Judicial system.

3.    That on 06/04/2020, the Hon’ble Supreme Court speaking through your lordship, Justice D. Y. Chandrachud and Justice L.Nageswara Rao issued various directions evoking the jurisdiction of article 142 of Constitution of India in Suo Motu Writ Petition No.5/2020 for assuring access to justice during COVID-19 pandemic by adopting new ways.

4.    That above mentioned directions mandated all stakeholders of Indian Justice Delivery System to adopt the two sets of novel approaches for keeping access to justice open even during the most severest catastrophic situations, the first set of directions are regarding the behavioral changes which are required to be adopted by all, under changed situations, and second set of directions are about the usage of digital technologies in accessing justice and delivering justice.

5.    That we at AJRI suggest your goodself, the two sets of practicable suggestions for urgent implementation for securing the Rule of Law during the COVID-19 pandemic Lockdown, and further propose your goodself for continuance of the same, even after normalcy regained. These suggestions if implemented would reduce uncalled the public gatherings in Indian Courts on one hand and will further enhance the sanctity in judicial proceedings. 

6.    That as per AJRI analytical research synchronized with ground reports gathered by our research team, clearly suggests that, India has 2,500 court complexes housing more than 15,000 Courts, further our research indicates that around 15, 00,000 cases come for consideration daily in the Lower Courts. The Civil Cases Vs Criminal Cases ratio in Indian Courts is 1: 2.5, The CrPC mandates the presence of complainant and accused in hearings of criminal cases, keeping. in view of aforesaid legal provisions and general tendency of Indian litigants,  more than 2.5 million litigants usually attend Indian lower courts daily in congested court complexes, apart from litigants, the Indian lower courts complexes hold around 15, 00,000 (2500x500) lawyers and their support staff whole of the day.

7.    That under above inscribed scenario, where around four million people attend Indian lower courts in a day, maintaining the social distancing would be a cumbersome work for authorities, on this issue AJRI wants to suggest that, the Lower courts should direct all lawyers to compete the procedural legal works like, filings of the written statements, the reapplications, the written replies and the written arguments in civil cases. And in criminal side, where cases are pending for arguments, these cases should be taken on priority basis and lawyers should be directed to file their written arguments in the support of their respective cases in accordance with section 314 of CrPC, prior to granting them opportunities for oral arguments, which will one on side enable judges to decide the cases quickly and on other side, it will minimize the duration of physical presence of lawyers and accused in the courts.

8.    That further AJRI suggests your lordship to issue direction to all judges irrespective of status of courts, for utilizing the lockdown period to write down the judgments in all those cases, which are pending for order/judgments and upload the copies of same in e-court website. If these steps are taken then it would prevent litigants to visit courts complexes for above mentioned purposes in future.

9.    That the situation in the Higher Judiciary including the Supreme Court of India is critical, wherein 26 Court Complexes hold more than 65,000 (26x2500) lawyers and their support staff daily, apart from these, approximately same number of litigants attend various High Courts and the Supreme Court of India daily. On this onset, we at AJRI suggest your goodself to first start telecasting live streaming of Court proceedings of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and all High Courts in accordance with the directions dated September 26, 2018 issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition (civil) No. 1232 of 2017 Titled Swapnil Tripathi Vs Supreme Court of India.

10. That the telecasting of the live streaming of Court proceedings in the High Courts and in The Supreme Courts will endorse the existing provisions of the Rule 1, Order 20 of CPC and section 353 of CrPC and it will also reduce the litigants physically presence in  the courts.

11. That the telecasting of the live streaming of Court proceedings in the lower Courts is not feasible right now in absence of basic infrastructure required, like uninterrupted power supply, ultra speed internet etc. in all district Court Complexes. Once capacity will be created at all district level Courts, then lessons learnt from the Higher Courts of India can be replicated in all the district lower courts after customized the same as per the local situations.

12. That the people are isolated at homes, travel is restricted, the right for accessing justice has been impaired, as majority of citizens in the locked situations are not able to engage lawyers and nor they have any other option to access justice in case rule of law infringed in their vicinity (especially in rural India), and not normally come into the notice of Indian Justice Delivery system through media or through other limited legal window. On this aspect we at AJRI want to suggest your goodself that all the Higher Courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court should release email addresses /other digital options for citizens, where they can send their grievances directly to the respective High Courts or even to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. This suggestion, if implemented urgently will open an additional window for accessing the Justice Delivery during this COVID-19 pandemic, which will also widen the suo motu jurisdictions of Indian Justice Delivery system.

13. That the move of conducting the court proceedings through virtual Court mode is a welcome step for transforming the Indian Justice delivery from files to fiber technologies, but the early feedback of the virtual Court mode suggest that, even at the High Courts and the Supreme Court levels, the mode is at its infancy stages that CISCO’s Webx is an approved videoconferencing app but still Whatsapp is being used frequently while court proceedings in case of the approved CISCO’s Webx fails.

14. That majority of lawyers who experienced the virtual courts despite various technological hurdles welcomed the initiative of opening of the virtual Courts for keeping the Justice delivery system moving even during the COVID-19 pandemic. Majority of lawyers advocated that, directly opening the virtual Courts for all lawyers, irrespective of their technological aptitude would be detrimental to their professional standings and would also be a great injustice with the litigants and ultimately to the cause of justice. On this aspect, We at AJRI suggests your goodself that, as concept of the virtual Courts in India is at its trial stage, and during this stage it should be tried with only those lawyers who are fully tech savvy that too after inviting their willingness to join virtual courts and once trial period will end, then a Standard Operating Procedure for Virtual Courts could be released after augmenting the general legal aptitude of a lawyer with available digital technologies. 

15. That We at AJRI suggests your good-self that apart from Virtual Courts ,help of a new technology called the virtual reality technology could be taken, which is easier for even non tech savvy judges and lawyers in conducting virtual court proceedings.

16. That the COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategy warrants the social distancing as a main defence against COVID-19, but bringing this sudden behavioral change is not a easy to carried out until we take help of behavioral science, which says human lives are in constant state of changes but these changes went unnoticed until it was over and done. It can suddenly become habits, once you do or see something new that you’re never had before, or like you, quit doing something you've done forever. The move initiated by your goodself, easing the dress protocol for Judges and Advocates will surely bring desired behavioral changes towards the social distancing. On this Aspect, We at AJRI suggests you that during COVID-19 pandemic all the judicial complexes in India should be cleansed and sanitized to the next level and giving them a new look, as this new look will always remind all the stakeholders of the Indian Justice delivery system for maintaining the social distancing in court Complexes. 

17. That,AJRI humbly request your goodself that, if the above mentioned suggestions are implemented during COVID-19 pandemic, will not ease pressure on judicial authorities to maintain social distancing in court complexes during the COVID-19 menace, but also in post COVID-19 it may bring decisive judicial reforms in Indian Justice Delivery System. 

                      Keeping in view the above mentioned humble submissions it is kindly requested to consider the suggested suggestions in the interest of justice, in case of suggestive measure are positively implemented in the interest of fairness an independency of Indian Judiciary, assistance from our side is always at the disposal of one of fairest and independent justice delivery systems in prevailing world.

                                          Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                                    Trustee                       Managing Trustee

Copies to All Hon’ble Judges of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India & Chief Justice of High Courts with humble request for considering of submissions made in our communication in the interest of Justice.

                                          Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                                        Trustee                       Managing Trustee

Enclosure:  Copies of Earlier Suggestions for Judicial Reforms suggested by AJRI to former Chief Justices of India

AJRI Suggests The Supreme Court & High Courts Ways to Reduce Pendency in Indian Courts

To,                                                                              16/10/2018

                         Hon’ble Justice Ranjan Gogoi,

                              Chief Justice of India,

                                      New Delhi.

Subject:  Practical Suggestions for Reducing the Huge Pendency of Cases in Indian Courts of Law through Easy and Feasible Judicial Reforms.

  Reference to the subject mentioned above, we on the behalf of our trust, the Association for Judicial Reforms, India (AJRI), want to humbly submit the following submissions for kind consideration of lordship for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary;                                                                                                      

1.    That our Trust, Association for Judicial Reforms ,India (AJRI) is working for the cause of Judicial Reforms by suggesting practical ways to all the stakeholders of Justice Delivery System based on public experiences and analytical legal researches.

2.    That as our Trust believes that evolution of present Judicial system within its jurisdictions is the best suited methodology to bring judicial reforms in India, we at AJRI work for documenting the public experiences of litigants/lawyers and synergize these with analytical researches carried out by our researchers, to suggest only those practical ways which if implemented as per present Constitutional/Statutory provisions could bring valuable reforms in present Judicial system.

3.    That public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary   guarantees the equitable and sustainable development of the society, absence/deterioration of which erodes the natural rights of all the citizens of democratically ruled societies like India, where as per National Judicial Data Grid statistics on October  16, 2018, the total 2,78,42,530 numbers of cases are pending in various district courts, means thereby that at least 8 Crore citizens always remain in judicial loop of Lower Courts(an average of  three person per case).

4.    That on the basis of experiences of litigants and Advocates, including all stake holders of Justice Delivery system duly documented by our analytical researches on “Huge Pendency of Cases in Indian Courts of Law ” warrant urgent improvisation for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary by urgently reducing the pendency over Indian Courts .

5.    That as per our Analytical research and majority of litigants and their lawyers shared with our researchers that huge pendency of Cases in Indian Courts of Law  is because of following reasons :

a) Non prioritization of cases for early adjudication ignoring the Case Flow Management Rules.  

b)    Inadequate numbers of Judges vis-a-vis pendency

c)    Multiplication of same cases for same cause of action.

d) Not honouring the intent of legislature for excluding the jurisdiction of Civil Courts in adjudicating the cases emerging out of certain governing acts.

e) Still existence of colonial way to serve court process like notice/ summons instead of ICT enabled process like email in cases there is official email address available.

f) Uncalled Adjournments for filling Written Statement/reapplications, adducing the evidences and for advancing arguments during trials.

6.    That the Non prioritization of cases  is the one of main causes of huge backlog of cases in Lower Courts, as per analytical research synchronized with ground reports gathered by our research team, clearly suggests that on October 15, 2018 out of the total 2,78,42,530 numbers of cases  pending in various district courts, 22,88,535 (8.22%) cases are pending for more than 10 years, despite the fact that various high Courts have already passed Case Flow Management Rules which provide prioritization of cases. As per our analytical research 53 % of total cases pending for more than 10 years are in the State of Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, where the Case Flow Management Rules have not been framed/passed and in absence of which we cannot imagine clearing the backlog of 8.22% of total pendency where justice has been delayed for more than 10 years. On this aspect we at AJRI humbly suggest you in the interest of justice to ask all those high Courts which have not framed the Case Flow Management Rules till date to frame these rules and implement these rules in true letter and spirit. 

7.    That inadequate numbers of Judges vis-a-vis pendency is second main reason stated to be for huge pendency in Indian Courts of law. On this aspect we want to respectfully suggest that appointments of judges in Lower judiciary may kindly be initiated in those states urgently which are largely contributing 50 percent in pendency like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Bihar etc.

8.    That the multiplication of cases for same cause of actions is the third major reasons for huge pendency in District Courts. Our research study on this aspect fortified that some litigants/ lawyers unethically filed various cases emerging out of same cause of action in different courts, and courts even knowing these facts do not initiate to club all these cases in one competent court, which not only hike the pendency but also complicate the adjudication in case of conflict judgments by various courts on same cause of action. On this aspect we want to submit that strict action should be taken for causing pendency by multiplication of cases, and registry at district Courts level should be unified under one local computer network so that it can check the multiplication of cases for same cause of action at time of filing, as such now this is no option for registry to check multiplication at time of filling thus this aspect is also adding uncalled pendency over Indian Courts and seriously hampering the cause of Justice more then only pendency issue.

9.    That the section 9 of CPC puts bar on civil courts to hear the cases which are barred by the provisions of various special acts despite this bar, all district Courts are flooded with cases where cases are filed ignoring the above mentioned provisions and same remained pending for years even this aspect have been brought into notice of concerned courts on first instance which is a also major causes of pendency in Indian Lower Courts. On this aspect we at AJRI conducted a research study which suggests that in cases where jurisdiction of civil courts is barred by the law, the majority of districts courts do not decide the question of jurisdiction on the first instance before proceeding further into full-fledged trial, which creates unnecessary pendency, which could be avoided if same is decided on initial stage rather than after full-fledged trails. It is humbly suggested that all Courts of Law should be directed to decide the questions of jurisdiction if same is barred by law first before proceeding full-fledged trial.

10. That as per experiences of litigants, their lawyers which is well synchronized with  our research suggest that if a case takes one year from its first hearing to final judgment majority of time consume in serving the notices to respondents and filing written statements which can be saved by strict implementation of existing law, as your lordship knows that the amendment of Order-V of Code of Civil Procedure through which the services of summons may be transmitted through fax message or electronic mail service but the same has not been become reality in district courts as well as in the High Courts. And in case of delay in filing written statements beyond the stipulated timeline, strict directions may be issued to all courts of law and lawyers for adhering to the stipulated timeline for filing the written statements as per CPC.

11. That uncalled adjournments have become the public presumption about in Indian Courts of Law, which must be rectified urgently for further enhancing the faith and trust on Justice Delivery system, on this aspect it is suggested in the interest of fair justice that maximum numbers of adjournments in a case may be fixed which either of parties may avail during a case. If this suggestion

is implemented it would not only reduce the pendency and also correct the public presumption about uncalled adjournments.

     Keeping in view above submitted suggestions, we request you that  in case suggestive measures are positively implemented in the interest of fairness an independency of Indian Judiciary, assistance from our side is always at the disposal of one of fairest and independent justice delivery systems prevailing in the world.

                              Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                            Trustee                        Managing Trustee

Copies to All Hon’ble Chief Justice of High Courts with humble request for considering of submissions made in our communication in the interest of Justice.

                               Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                                Trustee                       Managing Trustee

AJRI Writes The Supreme Court & High Courts on Judicial Reforms Via Information and Communication Technology

To,                                                                                       14/09/2017

                         Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra,

                          Hon’ble Chief Justice of India,

                              Supreme Court of India,

                                      New Delhi

Subject:  Easy and Feasible Judicial Reforms through National Policy and Action Plan for ICT in the Indian Judiciary. 

  Reference to the subject mentioned above, we on the behalf of our trust the Association for Judicial Reforms, India (AJRI), want to humbly submit the following submissions for kind consideration of lordship for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary;                                                                                                      

1.    That our Trust, Association for Judicial Reforms ,India (AJRI) is working for the cause of Judicial Reforms by suggesting practical ways to all the stakeholders of Justice Delivery System based on public experiences and analytical legal researches.

2.    That as our Trust believes that evolution of present Judicial system within its jurisdictions is the best suited methodology to bring judicial reforms in India, we at AJRI work for documenting the public experiences of litigants/lawyers and synergize these with analytical researches carried out by our researchers, to suggest only those practical ways which if implemented as per present Constitutional/Statutory provisions could bring valuable reforms in present Judicial system.

3.    That public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary   guarantees the equitable and sustainable development of the society, absence/deterioration of which erodes the natural rights of all the citizens of democratically ruled societies like India, where as per National Judicial Data Grid statistics on September 15, 2017, the total 2,56,34,165 numbers of cases are pending in various district courts, means thereby that at least 15 Crore citizens always remain in judicial loop in India (an average of  three person per case).

4.    That on the basis of experiences of litigants and Advocates, including all stake holders of Justice Delivery system duly documented by our analytical researches on “National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Indian Judiciary” warrants urgent improvisation for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary.

5.    That majority of litigants and even their lawyers shared that fruits of National Policy and Action Plan for ICT in Judiciary have not been reached to them as aimed through this Citizens’ Centric Mission because of fragmentation and miscommunication amongst its implementing agencies which have become hurdles in achieving desired aim.

6.    That the first advantage which commoner should get from this mission is that, he should get the message regarding his next date of hearing on his mobile phone as an SMS but this simple feature has not become reality for Indian litigants till date even after passage of after twelve long years of implementation of this Mission since 2005 in back ground reality that as per the latest report of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India which says that the Wireless Tele-density India in the month July 2017 was 92.0 3% and the Urban Wireless Tele-density reported 168.21%, as compare to Rural Wireless Tele-density of 57.04 % during the same period.

7.    That as per analytical research synchronized with ground reports gathered by our research team, clearly suggests that even the second largest stake holder of Indian Judicial System, i.e. the advocates practicing in various district courts have also not been fully benefited through National Policy and Action Plan for ICT in Judiciary after investing huge budget in creating ICT Infrastructure and hiring large number of human resource to run the ICT tools and techniques, as the simplest ICT linked reform like messaging to them regarding the next date of hearing of the cases is still a dream.

8.    That the above mentioned situation have arisen because of lack of ground level demands driven actions to utilize the available infrastructures and human resources, adding to this, the non-synchronization between technical minds and judicial minds also creating hurdles in  achieving the common objective, as result of which, the common man is still waiting for availing the slightest form of the Judicial reforms, like SMS service even after passage of twelve long years of this mission, our research team has worked on it and would like to suggest your Lordship that with simple result oriented solution we may bring some happiness on the face of the common man who is interacting with Indian Judicial system.

 9. That the above mentioned SMS service to the all litigants and their counsels can be made practical in District Courts by making e-Court Performa compulsory along with manual filling in District Courts, in that Performa mobile number or e-mail address of the litigants and advocates may be made mandatory, which is not a difficult feature to implement, as per our ground research team report, the Data Entry Operator in district courts, who enters data into e-courts data base from district court has to find the mobile Number and e-mail address of the advocate manually from each and every file, which is a lengthy process and thus he easily omits to do so to save his time, whereas, he never finds the mobile number and e-mail address of the litigant  in the file on record, instead this if Data Entry Operator be provide one page e-filing proforma for every new case than he does not requires to open each and every file manually, thus would make adding mobile numbers and e-mail addresses of the litigant/advocates easy for him and rest of work would be automatically performed by computer itself.

10. That as your lordship knows that the amendment of Order-V of Code of Civil Procedure through which the services of summons may be transmitted through fax message or electronic mail service but the same has not been become reality in district courts as well as in the High Courts, as presently there is no such proforma where e-mail address of the litigants or their advocates is recorded while filing case in Courts, thus the solution to this also lies in the suggestion that we have as humbly submitted in Para 9 of this letter, if implemented would bring reforms visualized by our legislature while amending order-V of Code of Civil Procedure.

11. That apart from above mentioned submissions. It is brought to your kind notice that e-courts websites in India have not been working properly for more than two months when our technical team tried to know the reasons behind this, the truth which came out that, it is only because of not using existing ICT infrastructure properly, same can be verified by looking into monitoring mechanism reports of e-courts projects.    

       Keeping in view Vast Mobile subscribers base in India  and our above mentioned submissions of Linking Mobile with Justice delivery system making it as an integral ICT Tool in e-Courts Projects may kindly be considered as this easy and feasible act not only reduce miscommunication between advocates and litigants regarding hearing dates of their cases but also may be used in spreading legal Literacy among citizens in future, in case suggestive measure are positively implemented in the interest of fairness an independency of Indian Judiciary, assistance from our side is always at the disposal of one of fairest and independent justice delivery systems in prevailing world.

                               Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                             Trustee                       Managing Trustee

Copies to All Hon’ble Chief Justice of High Courts with humble request for considering of submissions made in our communication in the interest of Justice.

                              Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                              Trustee                       Managing Trustee

AJRI Writes The Supreme Court & High Courts for Installing Public Address System in Court Rooms

To,                                                                        05/01/2017

                          Hon’ble Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar

                          Hon’ble Chief Justice of India,

                              Supreme Court of India,

                                      New Delhi

Subject:  Judicial reforms urgently required for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary.

  Reference to the subject mentioned above we, on the behalf of our trust the Association for Judicial Reforms, India (AJRI) wants to humbly submit the following submissions for kind consideration of lordship for enhancing public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary;                                                    

1.    That our Trust, Association for Judicial Reforms ,India (AJRI) is working for the cause of Judicial Reforms by suggesting practical ways to all the stakeholders of Justice Delivery System based on public experiences and analytical legal researches.

2.    That as our Trust believes that evolution of present Judicial system within its jurisdictions is the best suited methodology to bring judicial reforms in India, we at AJRI work for documenting the public experiences of litigants and synergize these with analytical researches carried out by our researchers, to suggest only those practical ways which if implemented as per present Constitutional/Statutory provisions could bring valuable reforms in present Judicial system.

3.    That public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary   guarantees the equitable and sustainable development of the society, absence/deterioration of which erodes the natural rights of all the citizens of democratically ruled societies like India.

4.    That on the basis of experiences of litigants documented by our researchers and analytical researches on “Judgment pronouncement in open Court to judgment conceived by all the parties involved in suits” which warrants urgent improvisation  for enhancing impeccable public faith and trust on fairness and independency of Judiciary.

5.    That majority of litigants and even their lawyers shared that while judges pronounce the order/judgment in open court the voice of the Judge does not reach them while sitting in the Court Room, which creates suspicion in their minds till the oral judgment pronounced in open Court is turned into written judgment, which as per routine takes 2 to 90 days.

6.    That the litigants whose decisions have been pronounced in open court but not conveyed to them due communication barriers remain in a dilemma till a written judgment/order comes, and during state of dilemma his/her faith on fairness and independency of judiciary always remains in a state of pendulum, which is not a good sign for Indian Justice System and should be remedied as soon as possible in the interest of justice.   

7.    That as per Rule 1, Order 20 of Civil Procedure Code   and section 353 of Criminal; Procedure Code the all Judicial Judgments are to be pronounced in Open Court, means thereof that it should not only pronounced publically in open Court but also be heard simultaneously by all individuals present in the open Court. On the contrary to this, in majority of cases where voice of judge is not loud and size of court room is large the judgment pronounced by judges in open courts are not heard by those for whom it is delivered. A judgment is the final decision of the court intimated to the parties and the world at large, by a formal ‘pronouncement’ or ‘delivery’ in open court. It is a judicial act which must be performed in a judicial way.

8.    That as humbly submitted above this situation emerging out of facts mentioned above may be remedied, if public address system is installed in all the court rooms in front of Judges and counsels for parties, then legal communication made in open Court will be able to reach to everybody present in the Court, this simple move would further enhance the public faith and trust on present justice delivery system and also complete communication process as intended in established law.

Keeping in view the above mentioned submissions it is prayed that submissions submitted by us may kindly be considered and in case positively implemented in the interest of fairness an independency of Indian Judiciary, assistance from our side, is always at the disposal of one of fairest and independent justice delivery systems in prevailing world.

                     Dinesh Singh Rawat                    Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                       Trustee                                 Managing Trustee

                                                                   

Copies to All Hon’ble Chief Justice of High Courts with humble request for considering of submissions made in our communication in the interest of Justice.

                             Dinesh Singh Rawat               Mrs. Jatinder Kaur

                                                   Trustee                           Managing Trustee