Kiran Raj

The Supreme Court of India disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by a 95-year-old litigant seeking the expeditious disposal of her second appeal, pending before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad for over a decade. The court directed that the petition be treated as a representation to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court for necessary administrative action.

The court observed that multiple litigants had approached it in recent months with similar petitions regarding long-pending matters before the Allahabad High Court. The court recorded that the Allahabad High Court is facing a significant backlog of cases and judicial vacancies.

The petitioner, Kamla Bai, filed a writ petition requesting directions for the early hearing of Second Appeal No. 1285 of 2013 pending before the Allahabad High Court for more than eleven years. She sought intervention for an expeditious hearing of her case.

The Supreme Court recorded that several litigants had filed similar petitions seeking directions for the disposal of long-pending cases in the Allahabad High Court. The court was informed about the backlog and vacancy situation at the High Court.

During the proceedings, data was placed before the court regarding the number of pending cases and judicial vacancies. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that delays in hearing cases were affecting litigants who had been waiting for several years.

The court was informed about the volume of pending cases and the shortage of judges at the Allahabad High Court. It recorded: "We are informed that each Hon’ble Judge in the High Court has with him or her around 15,000 to 20,000 matters. The High Court has a sanctioned strength of 160 Judges but unfortunately is working today with a strength of 84 Judges."

The court recorded that litigants are waiting for their cases to be taken up and decided. The issue of judicial vacancies was placed before the court.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that her case had been pending for more than a decade and that she had approached the Supreme Court due to the long delay in adjudication. The court was informed that similar petitions had been filed by other litigants seeking timely hearings.

The court observed that judicial vacancies and the backlog of cases were affecting the disposal of long-pending matters. It recorded that filling judicial vacancies and recommending suitable candidates for appointment could be a step in addressing the backlog.

The court recorded that judicial vacancies and case pendency require administrative attention. It stated: "The only way out is to take necessary steps at the earliest to fill up the vacancies, recommending suitable persons on the basis of pure merit and ability."

The court stated that it was not issuing any judicial directions on case scheduling but was referring the matter for administrative consideration. It observed that judicial vacancies and the number of pending cases were factors affecting case disposal. The court noted that litigants are waiting for their cases to be heard and decided.

The Supreme Court disposed of the petition and directed that it be treated as a representation to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court. It ordered: "The Registry shall forward one copy of the Writ Petition along with this order to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court."

The court further stated: "Let the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court look into the matter and pass an appropriate order in this regard on its administrative side."

Case Title: Kamla Bai v. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad & Ors.

Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 84 of 2025

Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Justice R. Mahadevan

[Read/Download order]