No infrastructure, so no Nagaland High Court, says law minister

EMN
Dimapur, April 28

Arrested development in Nagaland may also have arrested another of the state’s most cherished dreams: separate High Court for Nagaland.
The demand for a high court for the hilly state remains one of the most high-profile aspirations for the local judicial administration and political lobbyists. The pitch touched crescendo during the years 2008-2010 but the demand has yet to see fulfillment.
The government of India has said on Saturday that the lack of infrastructure or incomplete facilities in Nagaland, among a couple of other northeastern states, was the reason why a high court could not be established for the hilly state at this point.
Minister of Law & Justice, DV Sadananda Gowda implied in the Lok Sabha during a session on Friday, April 28, that infrastructure was a pre-requisite to having an own High Court.
The Gauhati High Court is the common High Court for the states of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. Separate High Courts have been established since March 2013 in the states of Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura. However, no such for three states from the northeastern states.
“Separate High Courts for the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram have not been established because the state governments (have) not completed creation of necessary infrastructure,” the minister said.
In accordance with the recommendations made by the Jaswant Singh commission and judgment pronounced by the apex court, benches of high courts are being established after due consideration of completed proposals from state government. The proposals are to ensure providing infrastructure and meet expenditure, along with the consent of the chief justice of the concerned high court, the minister said.
Requests for establishment of high court and court benches in different parts of the country have been received from various sources, including some state governments, he said. However, at present there are no proposals ‘complete in all aspects’ that are pending for consideration by the central government.
Minister Gowda cited the case of Kerala. The chief minister of Kerala had sent a request in the year 2005 for setting up a bench of the Kerala High Court at Thiruvananthapuram. “The Chief Justice of High Court of Kerala has not approved the establishment of the High Court Bench at Thiruvananthapuram,” he said.
The High Courts are the principal civil courts of original jurisdiction in each state and union territory. However, a High Court exercises its original civil and criminal jurisdiction only if the subordinate courts are not authorized by law to try such matters for lack of pecuniary, territorial jurisdiction. High courts may also enjoy original jurisdiction in certain matters if so designated specifically in a state or federal law.
Available records said that are 24 High Courts at the state and union territory level of India. Together with the Supreme Court of India at the national level, the High Courts comprise the country’s judicial system.
Each High Court has jurisdiction over a state, a union territory or a group of states and union territories. Below the High Courts is a hierarchy of subordinate courts such as the civil courts, family courts, criminal courts and various other district courts. High Courts are instituted as constitutional courts under Part VI, Chapter V, Article 214 of the Indian Constitution.