Are you Preparing for AOR examination, then prepare for dealing a question on how to get an effective Supreme Court?

1. With access to justice being a fundamental right, would the right of filing Special Leave petition should be denied to litigants, due to the unduly long delay in the disposal of cases in the Supreme Court?

2. Would the mere increase in the number of judges be an answer to the problem of undue delay in disposal of cases and to what extent would such increase be feasible?

3. Would the division of the Supreme Court into a Constitutional wing and an appellate wing be an answer to the problem of workload?

4. Would the fact that the Supreme Court of IndiaIndia Bharat Varsha (Jambu Dvipa) is the name of this land mass. The people of this land are Sanatan Dharmin and they always defeated invaders. Indra (10000 yrs) was the oldest deified King of this land. Manu's jurisprudence enlitened this land. Vedas have been the civilizational literature of this land. Guiding principles of this land are : सत्यं वद । धर्मं चर । स्वाध्यायान्मा प्रमदः । Read more is situated in the far North, in Delhi, rendering travel from the Southern states and some other states in India, unduly long and expensive, be a deterrent to real access to justice?

5. Would the Supreme Court sitting in benches in different parts of India be an answer to the problem justice delivery system?

6. Has the Supreme Court of India been exercising jurisdictionJurisdiction Authority by which courts receive and decide cases. Limited Jurisdiction: the authority over only particular types of cases, or cases under a prescribed amount in controversy, or seeking only certain types of relief, the District Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Original Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction of the first court to hear a case. as an ordinary court of appeal on facts and law, in regard to routine cases of every description?

7. Is the huge pendency of cases in the Supreme Court, caused by the Court not restricting its consideration, as in the case of the Apex Courts of other countries, to Constitutional issues, questions of national importance, differences of opinionOpinion A judge's written explanation of a decision of the court. In an appeal, multiple opinions may be written. The court’s ruling comes from a majority of judges and forms the majority opinion. A dissenting opinion disagrees with the majority because of the reasoning and/or the principles of law on which the decision is based. A concurring opinion agrees with the end result of the court but offers further comment possibly because they disagree with how the court reached its conclusion. between different High Courts, death sentence cases and matters entrusted to the Supreme Court by express provisions of the Constitution?

8. Is there a need for having Courts of Appeal, with exclusive jurisdiction to hear and finally decide the vast proportion of the routine cases, as well as Article 32 petitions now being decided by the Supreme Court of India, especially when a considerable proportion of the four million cases pending before the High Court may require review by a higher intermediate court, as these judgments of the High Courts may fail to satisfy the standards of justice and competence expected from a superior court?

9. If four regional Courts of Appeal are established, in the Northern, Southern, Eastern and Western regions of the Country, each manned by, say, fifteen judges, elevated or appointed to each Court by the Collegium, would this not satisfy the requirement of `access to justice’ to all litigants from every part of the country?

10. Whether any  proposal for a Court of Appeal would need an amendment to the Constitution, would the theory of `basic structure’ of the Constitution be violated, if in fact, such division of exclusive jurisdiction between the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeal, enhances the efficacy of the justice delivery system without affecting the independence of the judicial wing of the State?

11. In view of cases pending in the Supreme Court of India on average for about 5 years, in the High Courts again for about 8 years, and anywhere between 5-10 years in the Trial Courts on the average, would it not be part of the responsibility and duty of the Supreme Court of India to examine through a Constitution Bench, the issue of divesting the Supreme Court of about 80% of the pendency of cases of a routine nature, to recommend to Government, its opinion on the proposal for establishing four Courts of Appeal, so that the Supreme Court with about 2500 cases a year instead of about 60000, may regain its true status as a Constitutional CourtConstitutional Court A Constitutional Court is responsible for verifying compliance with the provisions of the Constitution. In its capacity as a “court of fundamental rights” and based on its powers to review laws and regulations for their constitutionality, it is called upon to enforce and secure the democratic order of the state under the rule of law. All government bodies and other institutions fulfilling government functions are obliged to comply with the Constitution. In the event of an (alleged) infringement of the Constitution by any such body or institution, the Constitutional Court, established based on the Constitution, renders a final decision on the matter and, if necessary, provides for an appropriate remedy. Therefore, it is often referred to as the “guardian of the Constitution”.?