New Delhi: Conceivably the most prevalent challenge faced by the Indian judiciary is the backlog of cases. The growing number of pending cases is only creating a burden on the judiciary. Under such circumstances, the judiciary is unable to devote the right amount of time to cases thus leading to a prolonged hearing date.
The solution to this problem involves not only increasing the number of courts and judges but also an easier model of the judicial system. TS Thakur, the Executive Chairman of National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), who is also in line to be the next Chief Justice of India pointed out on Monday the importance of Lok Adalats as an alternate dispute redressal mechanism.
He suggested that Lok Adalats were effective and had the potential to relieve the judiciary of its burden. “Lok Adalats have been effective and have relieved the judiciary of a huge burden of a trial, appeals and revision proceedings and resultant delays in the disposal of these matters,” said TS Thakur.
The Lok Adalat is an innovative Indian contribution to the jurisprudence and has proved to be a good alternative to the judiciary. The system has been practised at the grassroot level of the society for quite long and the legal terminology for it is just an arbitration. In Lok Adalat (People’s Court), justice is dispensed summarily without too much emphasis on legal technicalities.
Lok Adalat benefits the entire system as well as the people. There is no court fee for the people and if the case is already filed then the applicant is provided a refund. There is no strict application procedure and it is a faster and low-cost remedy to legal issues.
Justice Thakur also pointed out the fact that this procedure was already applied in several places and had witnessed huge success. “It is also pertinent to mention that as on 30th September, a total of more than 15.14 lakh Lok Adalats has been organised in the country, where 8.25 crore cases, including cases pending in the courts as well as those in the pre-litigation stage, have been settled,” he said in his address on Legal Services Day and Commendation Ceremony.
The NALSA Act is a worthy method to lower the pressure from courts as well as the people troubled by expansive and confusing litigating techniques. If the NALSA act gains awareness, it would help the poor and uninformed to have an equally fair chance for justice.
Justice Thakur also asked All India Radio and Delhi Doordarshan not to charge NALSA and the State Legal Services Authorities (SALSAs) in promoting legal awareness among the masses and urged for the Prime Minister’s support in this move.
West Bengal, October 18, 2017: “People almost treated me as an untouchable, and even passed abusive comments. But now people even come to me often requesting me to mediate in family disputes,” said an evidently ecstatic Joyita Mondal Mahi.
If we tell you about this Lok Adalat judge and her journey- tales of her struggle and battles against her family and the society at large, you would have nothing short of immense respect for her.
If we told you about her sexuality next, it may elevate your curiosity a little.
But what if we told you Joyita Mahi Mandal is India’s first transgender judge? Would it make a difference?
Should it make a difference?
From Joyonto to Joyita – Early Life
Joyita, who was born male and given the name Joyonto by her middle-class family, used to play games usually played by girls at the age of 3. Assuming that these interests would soon take the ‘regular route’ towards more boys-oriented activities, family members and parents ignored a young Joyonto’s behavior. However, the change never happened.
According to reports, Joyonto was once scolded for wearing make-up, a behavior unusual for boys to partake; subjected to bullying from classmates for feminine gesticulation, Joyonto was forced to leave school.
Lack of support from the family and school-mates alike forced Joyonto to escape from home in 2009, after which days turned to months, and then years, begging for a livelihood and sleeping on the roads.
As a transgender forced to beg on the streets to a social worker and finally assuming the chair as India’s first transgender judge at the Lok Adalat in Islampur in the North Dinajpur district of Bengal, Joyita’s journey has been extraordinary!
Challenging the Society
“Transgender” is an umbrella term that describes a wide range of identities, one of them identified as ‘hijras’ – people whose gender identities do not match with their biological sex.
Hijras, a term commonly implied for the transgender community in India, are often looked down upon by the Indian society. They are mocked for their mannerisms, are often made to feel ‘different’, and labeled as suitable only for begging or unskilled work.
Life was no different for Joyonto on the streets.
Now transitioned into Joyita, she demanded nothing less than what she deserved – respect and dignity that every human being deserves, despite their sexual orientation. A struggle that was not easy, her efforts eventually paid off and she crossed several milestones.
Joyita’s Efforts For A Larger Good
According to a report, Joyita established an NGO by the name of ‘Dinajpur Notun Alo Society’ to cater to the transgender community in North Dinajpur district. She had been working on a range of issues related to the transgender community since 2011
It was there that she got in touch with her ‘godfather’ Thanduk Sherpa, Islampur’s Deputy Collector and Magistrate.
Her godfather introduced Joyita to a former additional district judge Subrata Poley, who, impressed by her zeal and enthusiasm to fight against gender bias, recommended Joyita’s name for a judge in the Lok Adalat (civil court).
Finally, Joyita Mahi Mondal was appointed as India’s first transgender judge in Islampur Lok Adalat on July 8 this year
A Lok Adalat comprises of a senior judge, an advocate, and a social worker. Joyita, as a social worker, has assumed the position of a judge. And now enters the premises in a white ambassador- a vehicle categorized for government officials.
Has Joyita Been Subjected To Discrimination At The Adalat?
Joyita’s appointment as India’s first transgender judge was welcomed by friends and supporters from the transgender community who had flooded her Facebook account with congratulatory messages.
Sometimes I can feel negative vibes from those whose cases I adjudicate — strange gaze, or body language. However, I must add that none of them has insulted me. At times, a few are just surprised to see a transgender on the chair of judge.” – Joyita Mondal, as told to Hindustan Times
However, according to her, the environment in the Adalat is very professional and she has never faced any discrimination. She also added that the fellow judges in the court have also been extremely cooperative and treat her with dignity.
However, India’s first transgender judge is yet to gain acceptance from her family and parents.
The Long Battle Ahead
After the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in 2014 recognizing the third gender under the law that is neither male nor female, attention was brought where it was due – on one of India’s most marginalized groups, transgenders. The ruling redefined their rights and the state’s responsibility to ensure their development and growth.
Things have certainly looked up thereafter for members of the Indian transgender community- whether it was about finding employment in public offices or seeking admissions in National Universities.
However, the battle has not been won completely.
There is limited data on the total estimated population of the transgender community in India, but anecdotal evidence amounts it between a half a million to two million people.
While members of the transgender community have legally gained recognition, the decision is yet to seep down to the root level as they continue to face criticism and alienation from the larger society.
The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016 aims to ensure greater involvement of the trans people in the medical sector and welfare schemes and programmes, thus allowing for a more inclusive society. The Bill is currently pending approval.
In the words of India’s first transgender judge, ““More time is required for the society to change and we have to give it time.”
New Delhi: Nestle India on Thursday put a query to the apex consumer court as to why fresh tests were being allowed on Maggi noodles on food safety when a similar exercise had been ordered by the Bombay High Court and laboratory test reports were awaited.
The matter came up before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which heard the matter for around an hour and said it will resume at 2 PM. The bench of Justice VK Jain and Justice BC Gupta was hearing a class action suit filed against Nestle India.
“We are for the results of the samples from three laboratories as was ordered by the high court in few days. As such what is the need of parallel tests?” Nestle’s attorney asked over the suit filed by the ministry of consumer affairs for alleged unfair trade practices by Nestle.
New Delhi: Nestle’s arguments on fresh tests conducted on its popular Maggi noodles will receive a hearing by the apex consumer court on October 8, and take up the larger class action suit filed against the Swiss giant by the end of next month.
The decision was taken after after an initial hearing of arguments regarding the class action suit filed by the central government against Nestle India for alleged unfair trade practices.
Appearing for the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain sought more time from the commission to present the fresh tests on the 27 sealed samples of different variants of Maggi collected from the market, to which Nestle had raised objections.
Jain, along with counsels Mrinalini Sen Gupta and Prabhsahay Kaur, also placed the samples of different variants they wished to be tested before the court. But the Nestle counsel wanted to know from where they had been, since the product was withdrawn from the market on June 5.
A bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, comprising Justice VK Jain and Justice BC Gupta, said the court will meet again on October 8 to hear the arguments of Nestle India over the fresh tests.
The commission also questioned why Nestle India should have a problem with the testing of their own products, and said, “The government wasn’t producing the product”.
The government’s counsel had also filed an application to allow the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) as a party to assist the commission.
During the hearing Nestle India said the company has been singled out and questioned why its competitor brands weren’t being tested.
Responding to some test reports done by the government, which were missing from the application filed before the court and marked as “Not Applicable”, Nestle’s counsel said material supporting their company was being concealed and needed to be produced.