K. J. VAIDYA, J. ( 1 ) WHAT indeed is the right, nay more than that the privilege of the workmen, regarding, "speedy justice" under the Workmens Compensation act, 1923 and/or under any other Labour Laws and for that purpose even further indeed what are the corresponding duties, firstly, enjoined upon the Workmen commissioner and/or any other Labour Courts and for that purpose, in case if there is any insufficiency of number of Judges and Courts then in that case, that of, secondly, the duty of the Government also in this regard, under Art. 21 of the constitution of India to provide as many number of adequate Courts and Judges for speeding up the proceedings before the Courts. This precisely is principal thrust and theme of the discussion and ultimate finding to the questions raised here centering around this Civil Revision Application. ( 2 ) TO state few relevant facts briefly, applicant Naniben, a poor illiterate lady, aged 55 years, filed the compensation application, the same being W. C. Application no. 14 of 1985 before the Workmens Compensation Commissioner, Bhavnagar against two respondents, viz. , H. K. Dave Private Limited, Bhavnagar and M/s. Harlalka M. C. and Co. , Calcutta, inter alia claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 55,000. 00 on the ground of death of her son Rajesh who got electrocuted during the course of his employment with the Company. After the institution of this proceedings, the applicant was further constrained to submit an application Ex. 44 dated 1-10-1990 for joining Messrs. India Potash Limited as defendant No. 3 over and above the opponent Nos. 1 and 2, as it was also in the alternative jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. This was rejected by the learned commissioner vide his order dated 17-12-1990 and that too imposing the cost on the applicant, giving rise to the present Revision Application. ( 3 ) HEARD learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. ( 4 ) ON perusing the above order, four things quite surface to be shockingly noticed at once. They are, firstly, when the application Ex. 44 was called out for hearing, the learned Advocate for the applicant was absent and without hearing him the same came to be dismissed. Secondly, the application Ex. ( 4 ) ON perusing the above order, four things quite surface to be shockingly noticed at once. They are, firstly, when the application Ex. 44 was called out for hearing, the learned Advocate for the applicant was absent and without hearing him the same came to be dismissed. Secondly, the application Ex. 44 came to be disposed off because the W. C. Application out of which it was arising was of the year 1985 and thus according to the learned Commissioner, the same having become pretty stale it was required to be disposed off within 3 to 6 months. Thirdly, the application Ex. 44 in question was submitted with a view to defeat and delay the proceedings. and fourthly quite shocking and surprising the imposition of the cost and that too on the applicant-lady while rejecting her application Exh. 44. ( 5 ) NOW, none of the aforesaid considerations on the basis of which the application Ex. 44 came to be rejected, has any substance worth the name. Rather to be precise and put it positively, the same is a manifest specimen of totally perverse approach calling for immediate quashing and setting aside of the impugned order. 5. 1 Whether the learned Commissioner was justified in dismissing Exh. 44 application of the claimant to her utter prejudice in absence of her learned Advocate ? In this regard, it is indeed quite true that ordinarily the absence of the learned advocate, in the Court-room when the matter is called out for hearing is prima facie quite disturbing thing, as it does waste the precious time of the Court and accordingly such remissness if of the regular recurrence cannot be countenanced lightly to be encouraged to the greatest prejudice of the Court disciplines and the overall Constitutional call for the "speedy justice" enshrined in Art. 21 of the constitution. But at the same time in the instant case, and for that purpose even in many other such given cases, what ought we do not know that on the particular date and time when the learned Advocate appearing for the applicant did not remain present, perhaps he was having some quite, just and genuine, special and unavoidable bona fide ground for not attending the Court in time. If indeed that was so, then it was expected of the learned Commissioner to defer the hearing of Exh. If indeed that was so, then it was expected of the learned Commissioner to defer the hearing of Exh. 44 for quite sometime atleast to enable the applicant to call her Advocate. Thereafter also in case the learned Advocate was not available in the Court compound then the hearing of an application ought to have been adjourned to next date, more particularly when the learned Commissioner was not inclined to grant Exh. 44 application for joining the respondent No. 3 as necessary party/defendant No. 3 and that too in workmen compensation matter filed by the mother of the deceased son in her favour. Not only this but under some such circumstances the Court must also bear in mind that learned Advocates are also ultimately human beings and they once a while in a given case may not be present and available at the press-button call in the Court-room right at the time when the matter is called out, for some quite good, genuine, unavoidable and convincing reasons. In this view of the matter, ordinarily but for some special reasons, some reasonable allowance has got to be made for his non/late appearance either by keeping back or adjourning the matter for some time. Accordingly, in the instant case also, more particularly when the learned Commissioner was inclined to pass an order dismissing the application he certainly owed a duty to the cause of justice to adjourn the case to some future date giving short date so that the applicant may not feel that justice was denied to her in absence of her learned Advocate. In fact, under no circumstances, ordinarily such a case can ever be permitted to be mechanically disposed off without showing any concern for the weak and miserable litigants coming before the Court clamouring for "justice" without hearing them unless of course, for some special and adequate reasons to be recorded in writing it appears that to adjourn the case would militate against the very cause of the substantial justice. Further the absence of the learned advocate when the matter is called out is quite and altogether different and distinct issue, and for that fault of the learned Advocate his client cannot be, made to suffer and punished. Further the absence of the learned advocate when the matter is called out is quite and altogether different and distinct issue, and for that fault of the learned Advocate his client cannot be, made to suffer and punished. Accordingly, for that purpose whenever the Court, if on the basis of record available in Rojkam proceedings, is able to take a view that the concerned learned Advocate was in a chronic habit of not attending the Court whenever the case was called out, then in that case, it can rather it must once a while exercise its discretion by imposing the cost and for that purpose even an exemplary cost upon him and that too to be paid from his personal pocket. In fact, in such extreme gross cases the learned Advocates not attending the Court in time remaining absent the Court may in the first instance inform the concerned party that when the case was called out his learned Advocate was absent. Not only that but in the course of the day though the case was called out once again at that time also his/her learned Advocate was absent. It must accordingly further bring it to the notice of the concerned party that now the hearing of the case is fixed on next date and if on that date also the learned Advocate will remain absent, Court would decide the case on merit after hearing the other side. This can be and accordingly is required to be done in appropriate case to protect the interests of litigants rather to protect and uphold their fundamental right of the speedy justice under Art. 21 of the Constitution. This Order could be in the following form :- f O R M "today. . . at. . . a. m. /p. m. (as the case may be) this matter was called out and your learned Advocate Mr. . . . was absent. Thereafter, the matter was once again called out at. . . a. m. /p. m. (place the time) at that time also, the learned Advocate was absent. None has also mentioned on behalf of your learned advocate who has filed V. P. Accordingly, you are hereby informed that the cost of rs. . has been imposed, and accordingly, given further notice that if on the next date, i. e. , on. . . None has also mentioned on behalf of your learned advocate who has filed V. P. Accordingly, you are hereby informed that the cost of rs. . has been imposed, and accordingly, given further notice that if on the next date, i. e. , on. . . to which the hearing stands adjourned, if neither you nor your learned Advocate will remain present, the Court shall be constrained to pass appropriate ex-parte order in your absence with further order as to the costs to be paid to the otherside. Sd/- (C. J. /s. D. /j. D.)"5. 2 The above practice can also be adopted when there is an unjust, illegal prolonged strike placing the under-trial accused and other consumer of the speedy justice in an untold hardships, inconvenience and predicament. Not only this but in such cases the Court may also refer its grievance to the State Bar Council for appropriate action against the concerned learned Advocate, but in no case in absence of an Advocate, a poor workmen can ever be penalised as it has been done in the instant case. To dismiss an application for default of prosecution attributed to the learned Advocate and dismiss it without giving notice to the concerned party in a given case may bring about the serious injustice to the concern party to whose misfortune his learned Advocate remained absent. 5. 3 Turning to the second ground, it is indeed true that ordinarily the Workmen compensation cases are required to be disposed off within the shortest possible time and ideally speaking preferably within 3 to 6 months and in that view of the said time schedule the present W. C. application which was of the year 1985, its disposal had become quite belated and accordingly rather over-due as five years had already passed. But then, at this stage it was also the duty of the learned Commissioner to find out from Rojkam proceedings as to who was responsible for delaying the proceedings ? When the respondents themselves, by seeking indiscreet adjournments, delayed the proceedings for five long years, then in that case, merely because the compensation application was five years old, that factor standing by itself cannot be weighed to the greatest prejudice of the applicant. 5. When the respondents themselves, by seeking indiscreet adjournments, delayed the proceedings for five long years, then in that case, merely because the compensation application was five years old, that factor standing by itself cannot be weighed to the greatest prejudice of the applicant. 5. 4 Similarly, turning to the third ground it has got to be appreciated that the applicant had approached the learned Commissioner praying for joining M/s. Potash india Ltd. as a necessary party/defendant No. 3 to the proceedings under the legal constraint. In this regard as submitted by the learned Advocate for the applicant it ought to have been appreciated by the learned Commissioner that the opponent Nos. 1 and 2 had already shifted their financial liability to the proposed respondent No. 3. Under the circumstances, it had become quite incumbent upon the applicant to join it as a necessary party to the proceedings, for what ought we do not know that if at the fag-end of hearing or at the appellate stage on the ultimate analysis if the concerned Court was to reach a conclusion that the ultimate liability; jointly or severally, was that of the proposed opponent No. 3 also, then the claim proceedings to that extent may get unnecessarily further delayed from that point of time onwards. Under the circumstances, it appears that the ultimate desire and effort of the applicant lady was to curtail further unnecessary delay at the end of proceedings. In this view of the matter, it is indeed quite strange to find she being stamped out as interested in delaying the proceedings. It should be remembered that the workmen Compensation proceedings lodged on behalf of the injured/deceased are neither the luxury nor sport litigation. Furthermore, these sort of litigations pertain to the claim for immediate monetary assistance on account of helpless situation created due to the injury/death of the workman concerned and for them getting immediate compensation is a matter of survival. It is practically a sort of urgent execution proceedings wherein to allege that the applicant has filed the application ex. 44 to delay the proceedings is not only improbable and something difficult to gulp down violating the common sense, but the same may amount to adding insult to the injury. 5. 5 The furthermost disturbing part of the impugned order is the order imposing cost upon the poor applicant lady while rejecting her application Ex. 44. 44 to delay the proceedings is not only improbable and something difficult to gulp down violating the common sense, but the same may amount to adding insult to the injury. 5. 5 The furthermost disturbing part of the impugned order is the order imposing cost upon the poor applicant lady while rejecting her application Ex. 44. This is something quite unheard, shocking, and surprising. To impose cost on workman in such cases of Workman Compensation is not only unprecedented, unjust, harsh and savage hitting the claimant below the belt, rather to sum-up all these things in one word it is "inhuman". This clearly indicates on the one hand total lack of orientation of the learned Commissioner regarding the pitiable condition of the claimant and on the other hand injustice to the poor workers. To ask a worker and that too where she was not at fault to pay the costs to the opponents who are undoubtedly much well-to-do, is simply unthinkable and perverse and I just fail to find out as to what indeed was the impelling reason for the learned Commissioner constraining him to go to the extent of imposing cost on the poor lady. ( 6 ) IN view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order passed by the learned commissioner below Ex. 44 apart from being ex-facie unjust and harsh is patently illegal also, and accordingly, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside allowing this Revision Application with order as to the cost. M/s. India Potash Ltd. is accordingly ordered to be joined as opponent No. 3 in the main application. ( 7 ) NOW, this matter cannot be permitted to simply rest here by correcting some illegalities here and there and accordingly, in overall interests of the labour justice and workers ultimate privilege to get the "speedy justice" something is required to be observed by this Court. ( 8 ) UNFORTUNATELY, right from the year 1985, the compensation application filed by the petitioner for whatever reason has remained just undisposed till 17-12-1990 that is to say for about long five years, before the learned Commissioner, and thereafter, unfortunately even before this Court also which reels under quite heavy, acute and increasing pressure of work in all for long eight years. This indeed warrants top-most consideration so as to see that to the best possible extent such cases are comparatively expeditiously disposed off and do not linger on as a stigma to the constitutional promise of "speedy justice", as hollow like an election manifesto of political parties contesting the election. If the Court proceedings are to be protracted indiscreetly, causing untold hardships, inconveniences and suffering to the poor claimants, one should not be surprised if the aggrieved party either over and above the cost of proceedings may also some day further pray for compensation and damages for unjustifiably belated disposal of their cases or may in a given case taking law in their hands and settle and solve their grievance outside the Court by some extra-judicial methods. And perhaps quite rightly because when the constitution under Art. 21 mandates every Court to deliver speedy justice, and the said right to speedy justice accordingly being the fundamental right of the citizen, is unreasonably disregarded the same is clearly a breach of Constitutional promise (in absence of some justification) and the frustration arising from the denial of speedy justice was ultimately bound to uproot the faith of the litigants in the "rule of law" and for that purpose even the "administration of Justice" making them resort to some such indiscreet acts to immediately get redressed their grievances. Of course for this the Courts which are already overburdened with the backlog of cases cannot be held entirely responsible, as the ultimate responsibility of providing the adequate number of Courts and Judges is that of the Government and accordingly all consequential liabilities to pay cost, arising from delayed justice ultimately passes on to the Government. May be on just and reasonable explanation of concerned court showing bona fide in not early disposal of the case, damages for belated disposal may not be awarded. In fact, such matters under the Act are expected to be treated most urgently and disposed of as expeditiously as possible. For this purpose on his part the learned Commissioner must see to it that he does not grant any indiscreet adjournments particularly to the employer-defendant, even if the learned advocate appearing for the claimant does not oppose it. In fact, such matters under the Act are expected to be treated most urgently and disposed of as expeditiously as possible. For this purpose on his part the learned Commissioner must see to it that he does not grant any indiscreet adjournments particularly to the employer-defendant, even if the learned advocate appearing for the claimant does not oppose it. Opponent learned Advocate not opposing the adjournment application or the learned Advocate appearing for both sides jointly praying for the adjournment standing by itself is certainly not a ground to mechanically adjourn the case, unless the Court feels that (1) the adjournment is necessary in the interest of justice; (2) the party is not in habit of seeking adjournments, and (3) by imposing appropriate costs, in case adjournment is granted on party seeking the adjournment (save and except workers ). It is required to be constantly borne in mind that the Courts ultimately exist for doing justice, speedy justice and convenience to all consumers of justice in particular, the poor litigants and not at their costs for the convenience of some of opponent-employer or their learned Advocates or for that purpose for some slow moving Courts which do not take the desired interest in speedy disposal of the cases. In order to appreciate and in fact feel the real pinch of hardships and inconveniences as a result of some indiscreet adjournments, the concerned Court must place itself in place of the party approaching the Court seeking justice and the witnesses who come for giving evidence returns frustrated. ( 9 ) FURTHER, if the learned Commissioners take little care to be just aware of some of the rules under the Workmens Compensation Rules, 1923, it would surely keep them aware and alert in expeditious disposals of the cases pending before them. The relevant Rules 30 and 31 are reproduced hereunder :-"30. Diary :- The Commissioner shall maintain under his hand a brief diary for the proceedings on an application. 31. Reasons for postponement to be recorded :- If the Commissioner finds it impossible to dispose of an application at one hearing he shall record the reasons which necessitate a postponement. The relevant Rules 30 and 31 are reproduced hereunder :-"30. Diary :- The Commissioner shall maintain under his hand a brief diary for the proceedings on an application. 31. Reasons for postponement to be recorded :- If the Commissioner finds it impossible to dispose of an application at one hearing he shall record the reasons which necessitate a postponement. " ( 10 ) FURTHER still, in this regards we all also need to bear in mind that the situation wherein the injured and/or legal heirs and/or representatives of the deceased, when they make an application for compensation the same can easily be compared with a house caught on fire and the fire-brigade summoned to extinguish the same and the consequential damage which results, if the fire brigade reaches late even by some minutes and such application is not disposed of in time at the earliest practically remains the same. Thus, not to decide such application on urgent war-footing within the shortest possible period is indeed too serious a thing to be lightly countenanced as it loses all its charm and significance of the promise of the speedy justice under Art. 21 of the Constitution and the ultimate workman-welfare object underlying the Act. In view of all these indisputable things judicial pragmatism warrants and accordingly, it is required to be constantly borne in mind by all concerned that any inordinate delay in awarding workman compensation runs counter in the first instance to the immediate interest of the injured applicant or applicant member of the deceased family, in the second instance, against the spirit and object underlying the Act which is aimed to provide cheaper, smoother and quicker justice to the workers under the Act through special Tribunal than the ordinary Civil Court, in third instance Art. 21 of the Constitution of India promising speedy justice and in the fourth instance if we fail to deliver speedy justice, frustrated workmen losing faith in the Administration of Justice taking law in hands doing something quite unthinkable, including committing criminal offence also cannot be ruled out. Here you cant blame workmen suffering under tight noose of (rope) of financial crisis round his neck. If the law and Court both ultimately delay the justice, where indeed the poor workman is to go ?? Here you cant blame workmen suffering under tight noose of (rope) of financial crisis round his neck. If the law and Court both ultimately delay the justice, where indeed the poor workman is to go ?? It is for all these eloquent and resounding reasons, that not to decide compensation application and for that purpose every other case of the workers in time at the earliest is quite serious a thing to be taken note of by all the concerned interested in delivering the cheap and speedy justice to the needy working class. Be it a case under Workmens Compensation Act, or for that purpose, any maintenance proceedings, or in short any other cases involving injustice to the poor, Dalit, women, old, infirm, children, down-trodden, Schedule Castes and schedule Tribes, under-trial prisoners, workers etc. etc. such case should be treated as patient suffering from the heart-attack to be given top-most treatment in the intensive CARE UNIT. The pangs and sufferings of the litigants are difficult to feel for those unconcerned unless experienced by themselves. If the justice is the fundamental right of the citizen why should there be any unreasonable delay in giving that right when claimed, atleast within the reasonable time ? This would obviously be a reasonable question, demand of any enlightened and vigilant citizen much more the concerned Courts before which the labour cases are pending. Further, still to give yet one more illustration, enactment of the particular Act by the Parliament is sort of creating justice trust where the beneficiaries are oppressed/ aggrieved citizens to whom the justice is denied and the law-enforcing interpreting agency, viz. , Executive and Judiciary are the trustees in their respective ways appointed by the creator of the trust, viz. , the Legislature. Accordingly, while enforcing the law, in the first instance Executive and thereafter in the second instance while trying the cases and interpreting the law, judiciary both of them need to conduct themselves in a manner quite transparent, responsible, honest and accountable of the trustees mindful of their respective duties for whom they exist, viz. , the needy beneficiaries under the trust, namely, the particular Act. It is indeed quite true that it is not in all the cases, all the Courts, for all the times to come, that it can be singled out and blamed for protracting such compensation or any other cases. , the needy beneficiaries under the trust, namely, the particular Act. It is indeed quite true that it is not in all the cases, all the Courts, for all the times to come, that it can be singled out and blamed for protracting such compensation or any other cases. In fact, there are very many other contributory factors delaying disposals of such cases for needy and poor person of the society. To name few of such prominent factors, they are : firstly, it is the indiscreet adjournments granted by the Court, secondly, it is the rampant strike-calls. Thirdly the limited number of Courts to decide such matters at the earliest. As regards the first two factors views of this Court are already well expressed in other judgment, and therefore, no need to further elaborate the same here except to add few words. Accordingly, turning to the third factor, it has got to be stated that whatever fault for delay, the blame for the same lies to very great extent at the door of the Government, which has consistently failed to provide sufficient number of Courts and the Judges. What indeed the poor Judge is to do admist heavy pressure of work if and if indeed only the same is the only reason for delay in disposal of the case. Of course, in a given case it cannot be denied that sometimes the concerned Courts also to some extent are quite responsible for inordinate delays in deciding the case because of its lack of sufficient experience, interest, initiative, case papers misplaced, insufficiency of staff and other facilities, and otherwise for want of proper orientation to public cause in expeditiously deciding the cases on priority basis. In such types of cases the opponent-employer many a time is obviously quite interested in delaying the cases by dillying dallying and thereby protracting the proceedings. In such types of cases the opponent-employer many a time is obviously quite interested in delaying the cases by dillying dallying and thereby protracting the proceedings. Courts also sometimes quite inadvertently, unwittingly playing in the hands of some of the scheming employers who with a view to ultimately coerce the poor helpless workmen driving them to such a vulnerable and inextricable helpless situation where except to enter into the forced compromise to accept whatever amount was doled out by way of compensation without any murmer, there is no other go rather else to be ready to undergo all sorts of inconveniences and hardships in other words penalty of frequently attending the Courts for indefinite period and in case if the case is adjourned or the learned advocates are on strike, or for some such other reasons Court not available then also wasting the precious day of the life by losing the daily wages making them to wander perspiring from pillar to post returning home all frustrated. Bearing in mind this pitiable plight picture of the workers, the learned Workmen Commissioner dealing with such matters must be alive to all such tactics, mal-practice of the employer and discourage the same with an iron-hand by not adjourning the cases or if at all it is required to be adjourned for some good reason, then to adjourn it only after awarding reasonable costs and for that purpose in a given case awarding exemplary costs cash down to be paid by the employer to the applicant immediately, personally and in the open Court. The cost to be paid in cash in Court immediately why ? Because why should the workmen suffer days wastage, hardship and suffering for no fault of them. Why indeed expenses incurred in case by the applicant for attending the Court, should be kept pending. To undiscreetly adjourn the workmens case for no fault of them is indeed hitting them below the belt and the same cannot be prevented unless the reasonable cost is repeatedly ordered to be awarded to be paid in cash down in open Court. It must be borne in mind that the cost to be awarded in such cases cannot be formal or token but should be reasonable which takes care of daily wages, transport, lodging and boarding also of the party, witnesses as the case may be. It must be borne in mind that the cost to be awarded in such cases cannot be formal or token but should be reasonable which takes care of daily wages, transport, lodging and boarding also of the party, witnesses as the case may be. Here the costs are not to be merely credited to the account of the poor applicant worker as a paper-entry. But as stated above, as far as possible, it should be paid right at the time adjournment prayed for and moment it is ordered. This is the only way workmen proceedings could be made effective and time-bound delivering speedy justice rather substantial justice. ( 11 ) DUTY of the Government to appoint adequate number of Judges and Courts. Once again, incidentally turning to the most important burning question of speedy justice and corresponding insufficient number of Courts and the Judges, the State as well as the Central Government cannot escape from their ultimate responsibility, accountability of increasing as many number of Judges and corresponding number of Courts to deal with and decide as many cases that are pending and further which just go on increasing day-by-day adding to the already threatening backlog of the cases. No doubt this question does not directly arise in this matter but at the same time taking into consideration the plight of workers and the Labour Legislation since judicial notice can be taken of inadequate number of Labour Courts and Judges, as a Constitutional functionary, I deem it my duty to make much needed observation for something to be done to save the situation. In fact the Supreme Court as long back as in the year 1986 in a decision rendered in the case of Sheila Barse v. Union of India, reported in AIR 1986 SC 1779 has observed as under :-"one of the primary reasons, why trial of criminal cases is delayed in the Courts of Magistrates and Additional Sessions Judges is the total inadequacy of Judgestrength and lack of satisfactory working conditions for Magistrates and Additional sessions Judges. There are Courts of Magistrates and Additional Sessions Judges where the workload is so heavy that it is just not possible to cope with the workload, unless there is increase in the strength of Magistrates and Additional Sessions Judges. There are Courts of Magistrates and Additional Sessions Judges where the workload is so heavy that it is just not possible to cope with the workload, unless there is increase in the strength of Magistrates and Additional Sessions Judges. There are instances where appointments of Magistrates and Additional Sessions judges are held up for years and the Courts have to work with the depleted strength and this affects speedy trial of criminal cases. The Magistrates and Additional sessions Judges are often not provided adequate staff and other facilities which would help improve their disposal of cases. We are, therefore, firmly of the view that every State Government must take necessary measures for the purpose of setting up adequate number of Courts, appointing requisite number of Judges and providing them the necessary facilities. "11. 1. No doubt, the above observation of the Supreme Court is in respect of the criminal case, but none-the-less the underlying spirit of Art. 21 of the Constitution of India equally covers and governs the fate of other Civil cases and Workmen cases also under all labour welfare Acts. It appears that the said observations of the Supreme Court have not been given desired effect. Having regard to the particular fact that the rule of law under the Constitutional frame-work is our basic concept, the system cannot function efficiently and effectively unless there are sufficient number of Judges and Courts to handle cases without getting it unjustifiably delayed. Under such circumstances, when High Court and for that purpose even Apex Court evinces concern, evincing concern on behalf of the parliament also (.), concerned Government must also respond to it with the same zest and public spirit in forthright manner. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have made sufficient observations as regards the duties of the State and the Central Government in such matters. As a matter of fact to quote last six lines from the above Supreme Court decision, viz. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have made sufficient observations as regards the duties of the State and the Central Government in such matters. As a matter of fact to quote last six lines from the above Supreme Court decision, viz. , "we are, therefore, firmly of the view that every State Government must take necessary measures for the purpose of setting up adequate number of Courts, appointing requisite number of Judges and providing them the necessary facilities", this in terms prima facie amounts to clear mandate, order, direction for setting up adequate number of Courts, appointing requisite number of Judges and providing them necessary facilities at the earliest and accordingly, the Government in its turn cannot be permitted to take permanent convenient shelter that it has no funds to provide for more Courts and accordingly the Courts under the circumstances cannot force directing the Government to create more Court and provide sufficient number of Judges to meet with the situation. Yes, the Court ordinarily cannot force Government when financial aspect is involved but then the question is whether this defence of Government is permanently available where it ultimately and seriously prejudices, affects the "rule of law" and the constitutional promise of "speedy Justice" ? This shall have to be decided some day or the other. However, since the Government prima facie appears to have failed to give the desired response, effect to the aforesaid Supreme Court decision, it quite appears now that this vexed, embarrassing problem cannot be better attended and solved immediately and in near foreseeable future save and except (1) the elected representatives of the people that is to say M. L. As. and M. P. s. ; (2) active, effective, vociferous public opinion in this regard by social organisations; (3) litigants associations pressing hard for their speedy disposal of cases; (4) Bar relentlessly championing the cause for "speedy justice"; and (5) the press dedicated to uphold the Constitutional promise of "speedy justice" rise to the occasion championing the cause come forward in this direction and relentlessly pressurise and persist to help secure the fundamental rights of the people under the Constitution and the other Acts to have "speedy justice" till the goal is reached. Priority wise the importance of upholding the "constitution of India", "rule of law", "democracy" and for the purpose adequate number of Courts and Judges on the one hand cannot be underestimated than the requirement of sufficient number of army strength (territorial, Navy and Air Force) to defend the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of the country on the other hand. The reason is if we do not have sufficient army to defend the country the country would be in immediate danger to lose territorial sovereignty and thereby Independence. Similarly also without sufficient number of Courts and Judges the Constitution and the Law thereunder would be in imminent danger ultimately threatening the liberty and speedy justice to the citizens. Thus, in short and substance, if in order to save and protect the country from the external aggression, sufficient strength of army is needed likewise, to save and protect the country from the internal aggression of injustice, sufficient number of Courts and judges is also equally and unavoidably must requirement. Accordingly, priority wise next only to the defence of the country, the importance to protect the Constitution and the Rule of law and for that purpose, adequate number of Courts and Judges can never be underestimated. The resultant situation of not having sufficient strength in army and adequate number of Courts and Judges is practically the same; in the first case, the country would lose Independence and freedom and in second case, people subjected to injustice would lose all the benefits of the independent country and the Constitution thereunder. The resultant situation of not having sufficient strength in army and adequate number of Courts and Judges is practically the same; in the first case, the country would lose Independence and freedom and in second case, people subjected to injustice would lose all the benefits of the independent country and the Constitution thereunder. In fact, in my opinion policy-wise the time has also come when the legislature of its own should take stock of the present deteriorating situation regarding the mounting arrears and backlog of cases, with day in and day out addition of more and more cases, insufficient number of Courts and Judges to handle it and accordingly pass some such Act like, "the Speedy Justice Act", whereunder first of all on the basis of overall yearly population growth rate divided into its various sub-components such as (i) law and order, (ii) personal and other civil rights, (iii) agriculture, (iv) industry, (v) trade and commerce, corresponding addition of new legislations every year and (vi) the revenues and tariffs, working out rough and ready proportionate criteria/device/schedule/index to provide as many number of Courts and Judges and thereafter also making it obligatory upon the concerned Court to decide the case within the precise time-bound limit as far as practicable. If the case could not be decided within specified time-bound provided every judgment in such case shall record the reasons for the "delay". This to some extent will make the concerned Court little more conscious of deciding the cases as early as possible. ( 12 ) FURTHER still, for this purpose it also appears to me that likewise the economic Planning, (Defence Planning) of the country which is done by the national Planning Commission, there should also be separate justice Planning commission at the Centre and State level to take yearly stock of the situation, to precisely plan out - (i) the estimated growth of the (a) population (b) the litigation (c) the legislation (d) agriculture (e) trade and commerce, etc. , within next ten years (ii) for that purpose estimated requirement of further more number of Courts and judges, keeping in mind the huge arrears, (iii) further for this purpose, how many judges would be retiring during the course of ten years and the corresponding requirement of the replacement, (iv) how many Judges to be freshly appointed from the Bar ? (v) how many to be and can be given promotion, (v) even how many law graduates will be required to serve the legal profession ? (vi) what is the yearly enrolment of the Advocates ? and (vii) for all these purposes the estimated financial requirements. , (viii) the raising of the retirement age of the Magistrates and Judges to avoid possible, gap and insufficiency of Judges to meet with the problem of arrear of cases and last but not the least, (ix) if even after extended age limit for the retirement, concerned Judge or Magistrate is found fit to render services then in that case, to extend the period from year to year for sometimes as deemed proper till vacancies for sufficient number of Judges are filled up. Accordingly, this has got to be done at the earliest best and as early as the person requiring oxygen or the life-jacket is sinking for want of it to save the rule of law; if not from being completely dead drowned and eroded in the course of time, to suffer serious damages. Unless the importance of Judiciary as an instrument of speedy justice and the corner-stone of the rule of law and the constitution is duly recognised as only next to the defence of the country at the earliest possible and for that purpose, strategic advance planning is done, the ever-widening gap between the fast escalating population and corresponding galloping increase of agriculture, trade and commerce, industry, various legislations in the said regard on the one hand and inadequate machinery to deal with the cases for want of inadequate number of Judges in the court, on the other, would go on further widening ultimately becoming unmanageable affair, a nightmare denying fruits of Independence enshrined in the Constitution of india to the affected people at large. The result would be some people may start asking question whether the Government was of them, by them and for them. 12. 1. The result would be some people may start asking question whether the Government was of them, by them and for them. 12. 1. Having come across the plight of the applicant in the present case, where the compensation case merrily lingered on undisposed of for all these 9 years and from this only apprehending the unfortunate plight of the similarly placed many other injured applicants and/or family members of the deceased, this Court feeling quite worried and anxious to know about their fate as to at what stage other such cases were pending before the learned Workmen Commissioners throughout the state, was constrained to direct the Registrar of High Court to call for the latest information from all concerned specifically directing them to furnish the same as to how many such matters are pending before them, since which year, etc. etc. Pursuant to this direction, the information tabled before this Court is tabulated as under :