VMC2 - Respondents

MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT: VMC-2
Team Code:VMC 2
M.K.E.S COLLEGE OF LAW
VIDHIGYAAN – 2022
7th NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION
Before
THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDICA
FILED UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDICA
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL)
ADVOCATES ASSOCIATION………………………...APPELLANT
Vs
UNION OF INDICA………………………………. RESPONDENT
MEMORIAL for the Respondent
Page 0 of 26
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ..................................................................... 3
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................... 5
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ........................................................ 6
STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................ 7
ISSUES RAISED ....................................................................................... 8
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ................................................................ 9
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED .................................................................. 11
I. THAT SETTING UP OF SUCH PERMANENT REGIONAL

BENCHES OF SUPREME COURT IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL: 11
A. ARTICLE 130 IS NOT MANDATORY IN NATURE ...................... 11
B. ARTICLE 130 SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE GOLDEN RULE

OF INTERPRETATION ..................................................................... 13
C. ARTICLE 130 MUST BE SUBJECT TO PURPOSIVE

INTERPRETATION ............................................................................ 14
II. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

BENCHES OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDICA WILL
NOT MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE ............................................. 15
A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL BENCHES WILL

BE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE
PENDANCY OF CASES..................................................................... 16
B. ACESSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT CAN BE

INCREASED BY MAKING THE PRESENT SYSTEM MORE
EFFECTIVE ....................................................................................... 18
Page 1 of 26
C. AVAILABILITY OF BETTER SOLUTIONS TO TACKLE THE

PROBLEM OF EFFICIENCY AND FUNCTIONING OF HIGH
COURTS ............................................................................................. 20
III. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

BENCHES WOULD CAUSE PREJUDICE TO ITS SUBORDINATE
COURTS OR ANY OTHER AREAS OF JUDICIARY ...................... 22
A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH COURTS WILL

NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE EXISTING SYSTEM OF HIERARCHY
OF THE COURTS IN THE REPUBLIC OF INDICA........................ 22
B. LACK OF DETERMINATION OF AN APPROPRIATE COURT24
PRAYER ................................................................................................... 26
Page 2 of 26
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
1. Anshul Mishra v District Collector 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 1725 ..... 21
2. Bihar Legal Support Society v. Chief Justice of India (1986) 4 SCC
767 ....................................................................................................... 14
3. Brij Mohan Lal v Union of India 2005 3 SCR 103 ............................. 21
4. Gajula Rajaiah v State of AP 2001 SCC OnLine AP 174 .................. 11
5. Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd v Essar Power Ltd (2016) 9 SCC 103
............................................................................................................. 16
6. P Ramachandra Rao v State of Karnataka ......................................... 12
7. RC Poudyal v Union of India 1994 Supp (1) SCC 324....................... 15
8. State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India ................................................ 13
9. State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India (2018) 8 SCC 501 .................. 15
10. Union of India (UOI) and Ors vs SP Anand and Ors ......................... 12
Statutes and Articles
1. Constitution of India 1950, art 130 ..................................................... 25

2. Constitution of India, art 129............................................................... 24
3. Constitution of India 1950, art 130 ..................................................... 11
Other Authorities
1. Constitution of India, Debate summary of Article 130

<www.constitutionofindia.net/constitution_of_india/the_union/articles
/Article%20130#:~:text=Seat%20of%20Supreme%20Court.&text=Th
e%20Supreme%20Court%20shall%20sit,from%20time%20to%20tim
e%2C%20appoint> accessed 11th March 2022 ................................... 24
2. Ministry of Finance, Report of the 11th Commission for 2000-05
<www.tn.gov.in/tsfc/11threport.pdf> accessed 11th March 2022 ....... 21
Page 3 of 26
3. Ministry of Law and Justice, Report on Evaluation study of the

scheme of establishing and operationalising Gram Nyayalayas
(January 2018, Government of India) ................................................. 22
4. National Legal Services Authority, Who Is Entitled to Free Legal
Issues < https://nalsa.gov.in/faqs> accessed 11th March 2022 ............ 18
5. PRS India, Vital Stats Pendency and Vacancies in the Judiciary (PRS
India, 11th Oct 2021) <https://prsindia.org/policy/vital-stats/pendency-
and-vacancies-in-the-judiciary> accessed 11th March 2022 ............... 17
6. Shri TR Andhyarujina, Restoring the Character and Stature of the
Supreme Court of India (2013, 9 SCC J-43) ....................................... 16
Page 4 of 26
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS EXPANSIONS
¶ Paragraph
SC Supreme Court
HC High Court
CJI Chief Justice of India
Art. Article
AIR All India Reporter
SCC Supreme Court Cases
Comm. Commission
v./ vs versus
Ors Others
Govt. Government
Const. Constitution
Cr. Crore
PIL Public Interest Litigation
Page 5 of 26
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Union of Indica, the Respondent in the Public Interest Litigation filed
under Article 32 of the Constitution of Indica, concerning the case of
Advocates Association v. Union of Indica, humbly submits to the
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.
The present memorandum sets forth the facts, contentions, and

arguments in the present case.
Page 6 of 26
STATEMENT OF FACTS
THE COUNTRY OF INDICA- A BACKGROUND:

A megadiverse country admeasuring area 3.287 million sq. kms, the
Republic of Indica has about 138 Cr citizens. Governed through the largest
written constitution on record, it is a federal State and has a single and
unified judicial system with a three-tier structure, i.e., SC, HCs and
Subordinate Courts. The SC of Indica is the highest judicial court situated
at the capital of the Republic of Indica, New Deli. Its decisions are binding
on all other Courts, Forums, Tribunals, Bodies and applicable Authorities.
The CJI is the head and Chief Judge of the SC, which consists of a
maximum of 34 judges and has extensive powers in the form of original,
appellate and advisory jurisdictions.
STATE OF THE PROBLEM:
Every aggrieved citizen of the country is empowered to approach the SC

for the enforcement of their fundamental rights as per the process laid down
by law. Since the SC is the sole court of final appeal in the country, there
is a serious pendency of cases that severely affects justice delivery to every
rightful citizen. According to the National Judicial Data Grid and the SC,
presently, there are more than 69,000 cases pending before the Apex Court,
which also affects the livelihood of practising advocates. Hence, to address
this issue, a PIL was filed by Advocates Association in the light of Article
39A before the Hon'ble Court praying for the passing of directions and
necessary orders against the Respondents for setting up permanent regional
benches of SC in Mumbhai, Calicutta, Chinnai and such other locations.
Page 7 of 26
ISSUES RAISED
The following issues have been placed before the Hon’ble Supreme court
to adjudicate upon:
A. Whether setting up of such permanent regional benches of Supreme
Court Constitutional?
B. Will establishment of such regional benches of Hon’ble Supreme
Court of Indica meet the ends of justice?

C. Whether establishment of such regional benches causes prejudice
to its subordinate courts or any other areas of judiciary?
Page 8 of 26
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

BENCHES OF SUPREME COURT IS NOT
CONSTITUTIONAL:
The Constitution of India provides for the establishment of a SC, to be the

Apex Court of the Nation. Article 130 of the Indian Constitution clearly
establishes New Delhi, the capital of India to be the permanent seat of
residence for the SC. It does say that the Hon’ble SC is empowered to
change its seat of residence on a time-to-time basis, as per the discretion of
the CJI, pertaining to approval from the President. It must be brought to the
notice, that this article doesn’t cast an obligation on the CJI to set up
regional benches of the court, but is discretionary in nature. Hence, passing
any order for the establishment of such courts will be meddling into the
powers of the CJI and would be unconstitutional.

BENCHES OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDICA
WILL NOT MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE:
As per the current situation, the SC of Indica has the capital of Indica- New
Deli, as its only and permanent seat of residence. It functions as the court
of final appeal and its orders are binding on the subordinate courts. The
petitioner’s main contention for the formation of regional benches of the
SC, is the pendency of cases before the apex court. As per the data of the
supreme court itself, along with that of National Judicial Data Grid, more
than 69,000 cases are pending before the Apex Court. However, it must be
noted that behind the pendency of cases often lies the fact that the court
Page 9 of 26
considers best to investigate and hear all the perspectives of the case fully
and without any haste, to facilitate correct justice to the parties and the
masses at large. For that matter, it often gives ample amount of time to the
investigating agencies and the parties as well. Hence, it cannot be said that
the regional benches will facilitate speedy justice, as even they would
function as the court of final appeal and would need to give the same
attention and time to the cases. Furthermore, it will only add to the
administrative burden of the SC to look after the resources and
administration of its regional benches.

BENCHES WOULD CAUSE PREJUDICE TO ITS
SUBORDINATE COURTS OR ANY OTHER AREAS OF
JUDICIARY:
Currently, the judicial system in the Republic of Indica follows a tier-based

system for the hierarchy of the courts, with the SC at the apex level,
followed by the HC and the DCs. The HCs are the court of final appeal in
each state on the federal level, and the SC acts as the Court of Final appeal
in the entire country on the central level. A sudden establishment of
regional benches of the Apex Court may create confusion in the minds of
the masses, who won’t know whether to approach the respective HCs or
the regional bench of the SC. It will also affect the stature of the HC of the
state, who have been given a wider ambit of power in matters of issuing of
writs by the Indian Constitution under article 226. When compared to the
SC, the writ issuing powers are greater with the HC. Thus, establishing of
the regional benches of the Supreme Court will meddle with the powers
and stature of its subordinate courts and tribunals.
Page 10 of 26
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

BENCHES OF SUPREME COURT IS NOT
CONSTITUTIONAL:
[¶1] It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the
setting up of the permanent regional benches of the Supreme Court is not
constitutional. Article 1301 of the Indian Constitution clearly establishes
that the Supreme Court is empowered to decide its seat of residence, in
Delhi or any other place or places, as per the decision of the Chief Justice
of India with the approval of the President of India.
A. ARTICLE 130 IS NOT MANDATORY IN NATURE
[¶2] It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that Article
130 of the Constitution of India is not mandatory in nature and doesn’t cast
any obligation on the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India. Article
130 of the Indian Constitution clearly establishes that the Supreme Court
is empowered to decide its seat of residence, in Delhi or any other place or
places, as per the decision of the Chief Justice of India with the approval
of the President of India. Hence, from the language of the act it can be
inferred that it is mere discretionary in nature and needs the approval of the
President of India for the same.
[¶3] This contention was upheld by the Telangana HC in the case of Gajula
Rajaiah v. State of A.P.2, the court held that Article 130 cannot be
1
Constitution of India 1950, art 130.
2
Gajula Rajaiah v State of AP 2001 SCC OnLine AP 174.
Page 11 of 26
interpreted as requiring the Chief Justice of India to name a location or

locations other than Delhi as the seat of the SC. The court observed that the
question of whether the Supreme Court should sit in a location other than
Delhi requires the Chief Justice of India to make a policy decision, which
must be approved by the President of India.
[¶4] The same line of ruling was followed by the Hon’ble SC in the verdict
of Union of India (UOI) and Ors. vs. S.P. Anand and Ors.3, when it held
that making an order under Article 130 of the Constitution allowing the
Supreme Court to sit in a location other than Delhi necessitates first a
decision by the CJI, and then the President's approval of the CJI’s proposal
on the advice of the Council of Ministers. The court highlighted that no
court may order the CJI or the President to exercise the power provided
under Article 130 and appoint any other site or places in India as the seat/
seats for the SC’s sittings. In the same case, the court also found it worth
noting that a question of justiciability can only arise in the context of an
action conducted according to a provision of the Constitution or a statute.
Because no action has been taken under Article 130 of the Constitution, the
question of whether such action is justiciable does not arise. Thus, the court
declined to address the issue of whether an order issued under Article 130
of the Constitution is justiciable.
[¶5] Furthermore, it must be highlighted that giving any directions under

Article 130 would be encroaching upon the field of the legislature and the
executive, as was noted by the Supreme Court in the case of
P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka4. In its verdict, the court
declared that the courts can declare the law, interpret the law, and fill in
evident gaps, but they cannot enter into the realm of legislation that is
3
Union of India (UOI) and Ors v SP Anand and Ors MANU/SC/0493/1998.
4
P Ramachandra Rao v State of Karnataka (2002) 4 SCC 578.
Page 12 of 26
properly reserved for the legislature. The court noted that binding
directions can be issued for upholding the law and appropriate directions
can be issued, such as setting time limitations or drawing up a calendar for
the proceedings to follow, in a given case or combination of cases, based
on information brought to the court's attention. The judiciary is allowed to
do this. It may not, however, enact a provision, as the legislature does.
B. ARTICLE 130 SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE GOLDEN RULE

OF INTERPRETATION
130 of the Constitution of India must be interpreted in accordance with the
golden rule of interpretation. The golden rule of interpretation is a
modification of the literal rule. The golden rule reads the words in such a
way that the absurdities and anomalies of literal interpretation are avoided,
whereas the literal rule emphasises the literal sense of the words employed
in legal language.
[¶7] This rule was analysed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
State (NCT of Delhi) v. Union of India5, when it held that the golden rule
of interpretation states that one should follow the literal rule first, but if
following the literal rule results in ambiguity, injustice, inconvenience,
hardship, or inequity, then the literal meaning should be discarded and
interpretation should be done in such a way that the legislative purpose is
met. The court observed that the literal rule is based on the idea of
interpreting the statute's words in their natural context. However, if
interpreting natural meaning results in any repugnance, absurdity, or
hardship, the court must adjust the meaning only to the amount that the
5
State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India (2018) 8 SCC 501.
Page 13 of 26
injustice or absurdity is caused, and not any farther to avoid the

consequence.
C. ARTICLE 130 MUST BE SUBJECT TO PURPOSIVE

INTERPRETATION
130 of the Constitution of India must be interpreted in a purposive
meaning. Legal interpretation goes beyond a mere quest for historical truth.
Interpretation should be purposive in order to ensure that the Constitution
endures for ages to come. The interpretation of the constitution requires the
consideration of various facets that must be given due weightage to come
with a resolution that is consistent with the purpose with which the various
provisions were introduced. The purposive approach of interpretation has
gained prominence over the literal method. Hence, the constitutional courts
must not shy away from executing this foremost responsibility and must
instead, embrace the pragmatic approach. The essence and conscience of
the Constitution should not be lost in grammar. Although the rules of
statutory interpretation can serve as a guide, while interpreting
Constitution, the primary responsibility is to work out a solution.
[¶9] This can be further understood by the case of Bihar Legal Support
Society v. Chief Justice of India6. In this case, the court left the
establishment of the National Court of Appeal on Government through a
‘policy’ decision. It must be highlighted that the Supreme Court shifted the
onus of the establishment of such a case on the Government on the grounds
that such court would not be formed until the Government establishes it.
The court maintained that till such decision is taken, it would interfere only
6
Bihar Legal Support Society v Chief Justice of India (1986) 4 SCC 767.
Page 14 of 26
in a restricted class of issues where a substantial question of law is

involved, and which needs to be decided by the apex court for the entire
country or where there is a grave, blatant and atrocious miscarriage of
justice.
[¶10] Furthermore, the Supreme Court of India, while commenting upon

the crucial issue of interpretation in the case of State (NCT of Delhi) v.
Union of India 7, said that the Constitution of India is an organic and living
document, which contains words that potentially does possess many
concepts. The court also cited the case of R.C. Poudyal v. Union of India8
which said that the words are the framework of concepts in the process
of interpretation of a constitutional document, and conceptions can alter
more than words. The need for modifying the conceptions themselves is
critical, and constitutional difficulties cannot be resolved simply by
appealing to the meaning of words without acknowledging the trajectory
of their evolution. The court further commented that the purpose of a
constitution is more to delineate principles than to engrave specifics.

BENCHES OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDICA
WILL NOT MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE
establishment of such regional benches of Hon’ble Supreme Court of
Indica will not meet the ends of justice. As per the current situation, the
Supreme Court of Indica has the capital of Indica- New Deli, as its only
and permanent seat of residence. It functions as the court of final appeal
7
State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India (2018) 8 SCC 501.
8
RC Poudyal v Union of India 1994 Supp (1) SCC 324.
Page 15 of 26
and its orders are binding on the subordinate courts. Any sudden changes
can complicate things.
A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL BENCHES WILL

BE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE
PENDANCY OF CASES
Indica that the establishment of such regional benches will be counter-
productive with respect to the pendency of cases.
[¶13] In Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Essar Power Ltd.9, the Court
criticized the broad use of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the
Constitution. The Court examined whether Statutory appeals from Tribunal
orders were immediately before the Supreme Court in situations that were
not of national or public significance. The Court relied on an article written
by Shri T.R. Andhyarujina 10, the former Solicitor General of India, to
emphasise the "constitutional importance" of matters involving substantial
questions of law of national importance as the "exceptional" quality under
which statutory appeals from Tribunal orders would lie.
[¶14] We must note that the Supreme Court today, has diverged from its
initial role as a Constitutional Court in favour of becoming an ordinary
court of appeals. It was discovered that there was a net yearly rise of 6.8
percent per year. This Court was asked in Mathai v George11 whether
Special Leave Petitions should or should not be considered against all types
9
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd v Essar Power Ltd (2016) 9 SCC 103.
10
Shri TR Andhyarujina, Restoring the Character and Stature of the Supreme Court of India (2013, 9
SCC J-43).
11
Mathai v George (2010) 4 SCC 358.
Page 16 of 26
of orders. This Court observed that litigants were filing Special Leave
Petitions against nearly every single type of order, resulting in huge arrears
and transforming this Court into an ordinary appellate court, which was not
the aim of the framers of the Constitution when they enacted Article 136.
The Court determined that the Supreme Court's exercise of jurisdiction
under Article 136 of the Constitution was discretionary and that the
provision did not establish a vested right of appeal on a party in litigation.
[¶15] With this in mind, it should be emphasised that, while an SLP is

discretionary, the lawsuit rate on the same is unlikely to reduce. Because
the court still has a high pendency rate 'self-restraint' will only result in
terrible injustice because many of these cases clearly involve a larger legal
matter. As a result, just adding additional judges, that may be added
through the appellate courts will not alleviate the problem of pending cases.
The court today follows a ‘strict approach’ when it comes to accepting
SLPs in the court. Despite this, many cases relating to SLPs are heard in
the apex court. There is no reason as to why, in the presented model, the
cases that are heard in the appellate court, won’t move to the Apex court.
[¶17] An analogy can be drawn from the functioning of the High Court’s
where pendency of cases is still an issue. According to data collected
between 2010 and 2020, pendency across all courts grew 2.8% annually
and as of September 2021 out of the 4.5 crore pending cases 87.6% of them
are in subordinate courts12 which furthers the argument that having
multiple benches of a court does not solve the issue of pendency as deemed.
Despite the existence of multiple regional benches of multiple High Courts
there is a relative increase in the pendency of cases.
12
PRS India, Vital Stats Pendency and Vacancies in the Judiciary (PRS India, 11th Oct 2021)
<https://prsindia.org/policy/vital-stats/pendency-and-vacancies-in-the-judiciary> accessed 11th March
2022.
Page 17 of 26
B. ACESSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT CAN BE

INCREASED BY MAKING THE PRESENT SYSTEM MORE
EFFECTIVE
Indica that the issue of accessibility of courts can be better addressed by
making the current model more effective. This is a better alternative to
creating new infrastructure that might disrupt the entire system.
[¶18] The provision of free legal services in civil and criminal cases to poor
and marginalised persons who cannot afford the services of a lawyer for
the conduct of a case or legal action in any Court, Tribunal, or Authority is
known as free legal aid. The National Legal Services Authority is in charge
of these services, which are controlled by the Legal Services Authorities
Act of 198713 (NALSA). One may approach The Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee for assistance with regard to cases before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court.
[¶19] Legal Services include giving Free Legal Aid to people in need who
fall under the ambit of Section 12 of the Legal Services Authority Act of
1987. It also comprises disseminating legal literacy through legal
awareness camps, print media, and digital media, as well as conducting
Lok Adalats for the amicable resolution of pending or yet-to-be-filed cases
through compromise. NALSA also takes the required procedures through
social action lawsuits to address any issue of particular concern to the
society's weaker members. Legal services also include assisting recipients
13
National Legal Services Authority, Who Is Entitled to Free Legal Issues < https://nalsa.gov.in/faqs>
accessed 11th March 2022.
Page 18 of 26
in obtaining their entitlements under different government initiatives,

regulations, and legislation.
[¶20] Free legal assistance may include the following:
a) Legal representation by an Advocate;
b) Payment of process expenses, witness expenditures, and any other costs

payable or incurred in connection with any legal proceedings in appropriate
cases;
c) Preparation of paper book, including printing pleadings, memo of

appeal, and translation of documents;
d) Drafting of legal documents, special leave petition, and so on;
e) Providing certified copies of judgements, orders, evidence notes, and

other documents in judicial procedures.
[¶21] Free Legal Services also comprise the provision of assistance and
advice to beneficiaries in order for them to receive benefits under welfare
legislation and initiatives defined by the Central Government or the State
Government, as well as to assure access to justice in any other way.
[¶22] One can apply for free legal help both in person and online. It is also
possible to apply vocally; in such circumstances, a may contact a paralegal
volunteer or an official of the relevant Legal Services Authority. This
ensures that such help is available not only to people of the low-income
strata but also to those living away from Deli.
[¶23] Additionally, the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, today

also has a Middle-income group scheme that provides proportional services
to citizens falling under the middle-income group. This plan is designed to
give legal services to middle-income citizens, i.e., those whose gross
Page 19 of 26
maximum monthly income does not exceed Rs.10,000/- and whose annual
income does not surpass Rs.2,00,000/-14.
C. AVAILABILITY OF BETTER SOLUTIONS TO TACKLE THE

PROBLEM OF EFFICIENCY AND FUNCTIONING OF HIGH
COURTS
[¶24] It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that better
solutions are available to tackle the problem of pendency of cases in the
Hon’ble SC instead of establishment of the proposed regional benches.
These alternatives are not only more feasible but also will prevent the major
structural changes this proposal suggests.
[¶25] Judicial intervention can enhance productivity by implementing

administrative decisions suc0h as increasing the number of working days
in courts to so that judicial officers are able to handle the pendency of cases.
Further, to reduce pendency it can be dealt with the appointment of court
managers to assist judges and reduce understaffing.
[¶26] Virtual courts as a means to reduce pendency is more economical in

nature as compared to setting up of permanent regional benches. In a virtual
court setup, courts would not only become accessible for citizen living in
far-away states but also become accessible for low-income families who
now would not have to bear the cost of moving to bigger cities for court
hearings. It an undeniable fact that the transactional cost of litigation and
for individuals in remote areas accessibility becomes an issue but the
burden of whether cassation benches is the only viable solution is not
affirmative in nature. In the era of technology, the justice delivery system
14
Maharashtra Legal Services, Supreme Court middle Income Group Legal Aid Scheme
<https://legalservices.maharashtra.gov.in/Site/Upload/Pdf/sc-scheme.pdf> accessed 11th March 2022.
Page 20 of 26
has scope for reformative recourses and that the cost incurred on setting up
permanent regional benches would be exorbitant and the resources utilised
in that can be channelled to strengthen the digital infrastructure. Digital
justice is cheaper and faster besides addressing locational and economic
handicaps thus the cost benefit ratio for investing in the latter is much more
than the former.
[¶27] The advantages of a virtual high court were reiterated in an order by

the Madras High Court in the case of Anshul Mishra v The District
Collector and Ors 15 which stated
“… The virtual court is a boon to the entire Legal Fraternity. Even a

Mofussil Advocate residing in a remote village in Kanyakumari can
comfortably present his case before this court, the Principal Seat and even
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court”.
[¶28] Further, it is humbly submitted that the Ministry of Justice has also
formulated schemes to encourage digital infrastructure which vitiates the
need for setting up physical permanent regional benches of the Supreme
Court through projects like Ecourts Project, JustIS mobile app which
provides data on pendency of cases, disposal details and is much more
organised than the physical management of the same.
[¶29] Instead of setting up permanent regional benches another viable

option would be to set up fast track courts which was meant to reduce
pendency16 and in Brij Mohan Lal v Union of India17 fast track courts were
given assent and around 32 lakh cases were disposed of in 2011 with a
15
Anshul Mishra v District Collector 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 1725.
16
Ministry of Finance, Report of the 11th Commission for 2000-05
<www.tn.gov.in/tsfc/11threport.pdf> accessed 11 th March 2022.
17
Brij Mohan Lal v Union of India 2005 3 SCR 103.
Page 21 of 26
recommendation that they be set up in every state to solve litigation

pendency.18
[¶30] Hence, it is reiterated that alternative solutions to tackle the hurdles

to justice must be explored before undergoing a large investment and
setting up permanent regional benches of the Supreme Court which has
been explicated in the submission above. Increasing the quantum of courts
will not solve issues like pendency, it will encourage and increase litigation
by providing incentives to appeal.

BENCHES WOULD CAUSE PREJUDICE TO ITS
SUBORDINATE COURTS OR ANY OTHER AREAS OF
JUDICIARY
establishment of such regional benches of the Supreme Court would
cause prejudice to its subordinate courts or any other areas of the
judiciary.
A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH COURTS WILL

NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE EXISTING SYSTEM OF
HIERARCHY OF THE COURTS IN THE REPUBLIC OF INDICA.
establishment of such regional benches of the Supreme Court will
negatively affect the existing system of hierarchy of the Courts in the
Republic of Indica.
18
Ministry of Law and Justice, Report on Evaluation study of the scheme of establishing and
operationalising Gram Nyayalayas (January 2018, Government of India).
Page 22 of 26
[¶33] Currently, the judicial system in the Republic of Indica follows a tier-
based system for the hierarchy of the courts, with the SC at the apex level,
followed by the HC and the DCs. The HCs are the court of final appeal in
each state on the federal level, and the SC acts as the Court of Final appeal
in the entire country on the central level. The current judicial administration
system derives its power from the Constitution of India. The Supreme
Court of India is the Apex Court, which derives power from Part V, Chapter
IV of the Indian Constitution, which also established it as the guardian of
the Constitution of India. Then comes the High Court, formed under Part
IV, Chapter V of the Constitution of India. These High Courts have their
respective state constituencies where they act as the felicitator of justice.
The High Courts are also responsible for the administration of the
Subordinate Courts, which are structured on the basis of population,
number of cases, etc.
[¶34] Given the fact that the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal will
be the last courts for constitutional and public law concerns, as well as
appeals, it is crucial to note that there is no expressly designated process
providing for proper case allocation. Appeals are sometimes disguised as
petitions for original jurisdiction, and properly stated appeals may raise
important constitutional law issues. In such cases, a matter must be sent to
an appropriate venue in order to provide sufficient justice. A system for
distributing such cases between the Supreme Court and the Courts of
Appeal remains a point of debate, which impedes the Court of Appeal's
formation. The proposed model appears impractical in the sense that the
CJI will be expected to allocate and keep track of cases that are being heard
in far-off regions. Additionally intra-court hierarchy of these Appellate
courts is an important discussion that has not taken place yet, in such a
scenario, who would be made responsible to decide which cases should
Page 23 of 26
further be passed on to the Supreme Court? These are important questions

that remain unanswered in the current model of the Appellate court.
[¶35] Furthermore, the establishment of the regional benches will put

additional financial and executive pressure on the Apex Court to look after
their administration and resources. Thus, it will negatively affect the
hierarchy of the courts and cause prejudice to the subordinate courts of our
justice system.
B. LACK OF DETERMINATION OF AN APPROPRIATE COURT
establishment of such regional benches of the Supreme Court will led to
lack of determination of an appropriate Court. It must be highlighted that
currently an already established judicial system is in place.
[¶37] During the framing of Article 12919, questions were raised by the
members of the constitution assembly regarding the seat of the Supreme
Court in New Delhi. To this, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee20
justified the need to name New Delhi as the seat of the court, claiming that
all courts must have a designated seat so that litigants know where to go.
Furthermore, because Delhi was the capital during the debates, it was the
most appropriate place to be the Supreme Court's seat.
[¶38] Thus, it can be inferred that the intent of the makers of the
Constitution was to keep New Delhi as the permanent seat of the Supreme
19
20
<www.constitutionofindia.net/constitution_of_india/the_union/articles/Article%20130#:~:text=Seat%2
0of%20Supreme%20Court.&text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20shall%20sit,from%20time%20to%2
0time%2C%20appoint> accessed 11th March 2022.
Page 24 of 26
Court in order to facilitate access to justice amongst the masses and prevent
any confusions and chaos regarding the same.
[¶39] Additionally, the Indian constitution provides Article 13621 which

states that “…the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave
to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in
any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory
of India”. In the proposed system, ideally most SLPs will first go to the
regional benches and then be sieved to reach the Supreme Court, however,
Article 136 empowers individuals to seek extraordinary powers from the
Supreme Court, and because it is a basic structure of the Constitution, it
cannot be modified.
[¶40] It must be noted that an amendment of Article 136 of the Constitution

will amount to a change in the basic constitutional framework of the
Supreme Court and such interpretation goes against the essence of the
judgement given out in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. In such a
scenario there exists no authority to prevent citizens from initiating
litigation at the New Deli bench of Supreme Court.
21
Page 25 of 26
PRAYER
Wherefore in the light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments
advanced, and authorities cited, may this Hon’ble Court be pleased to
adjudge and declare that:
I. That the setting up of such permanent regional benches of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court is not constitutional as per Article 130.
II. That the establishment of such regional benches of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of Indica will not meet the ends of justice.
III. That the establishment of such regional benches would cause

prejudice to its subordinate courts or any other areas of judiciary.
And /Or
Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of justice,
equity,
and good conscience.
s/d
On Behalf of Respondent
Page 26 of 26

VMC2 - Respondents

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VMC2 - Respondents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEMORIAL FOR THE RESPONDENT: VMC-2

7th NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDICA

FILED UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDICA

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL)

MEMORIAL for the Respondent

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ..................................................................... 3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................... 5

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ........................................................ 6

STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................ 7

ISSUES RAISED ....................................................................................... 8

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ................................................................ 9

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED .................................................................. 11

I. THAT SETTING UP OF SUCH PERMANENT REGIONAL

A. ARTICLE 130 IS NOT MANDATORY IN NATURE ...................... 11

B. ARTICLE 130 SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE GOLDEN RULE

C. ARTICLE 130 MUST BE SUBJECT TO PURPOSIVE

II. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL BENCHES WILL

B. ACESSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT CAN BE

C. AVAILABILITY OF BETTER SOLUTIONS TO TACKLE THE

III. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH COURTS WILL

B. LACK OF DETERMINATION OF AN APPROPRIATE COURT24

2. Bihar Legal Support Society v. Chief Justice of India (1986) 4 SCC

4. Gajula Rajaiah v State of AP 2001 SCC OnLine AP 174 .................. 11

7. RC Poudyal v Union of India 1994 Supp (1) SCC 324....................... 15

8. State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India ................................................ 13

9. State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India (2018) 8 SCC 501 .................. 15

Statutes and Articles

1. Constitution of India 1950, art 130 ..................................................... 25

1. Constitution of India, Debate summary of Article 130

3. Ministry of Law and Justice, Report on Evaluation study of the

The present memorandum sets forth the facts, contentions, and

THE COUNTRY OF INDICA- A BACKGROUND:

STATE OF THE PROBLEM:

Every aggrieved citizen of the country is empowered to approach the SC

A. Whether setting up of such permanent regional benches of Supreme

Court of Indica meet the ends of justice?

to its subordinate courts or any other areas of judiciary?

I. THAT SETTING UP OF SUCH PERMANENT REGIONAL

The Constitution of India provides for the establishment of a SC, to be the

II. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

III. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

Currently, the judicial system in the Republic of Indica follows a tier-based

I. THAT SETTING UP OF SUCH PERMANENT REGIONAL

A. ARTICLE 130 IS NOT MANDATORY IN NATURE

interpreted as requiring the Chief Justice of India to name a location or

[¶5] Furthermore, it must be highlighted that giving any directions under

B. ARTICLE 130 SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE GOLDEN RULE

injustice or absurdity is caused, and not any farther to avoid the

C. ARTICLE 130 MUST BE SUBJECT TO PURPOSIVE

in a restricted class of issues where a substantial question of law is

[¶10] Furthermore, the Supreme Court of India, while commenting upon

II. THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL

A. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH REGIONAL BENCHES WILL

[¶15] With this in mind, it should be emphasised that, while an SLP is

B. ACESSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT CAN BE

in obtaining their entitlements under different government initiatives,

[¶20] Free legal assistance may include the following:

a) Legal representation by an Advocate;

b) Payment of process expenses, witness expenditures, and any other costs

c) Preparation of paper book, including printing pleadings, memo of

d) Drafting of legal documents, special leave petition, and so on;