The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking the disposal of all pending cases in the Indian judiciary within eleven months.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, highlighted the overwhelming workload of Indian courts, which makes such timelines unrealistic.

While acknowledging the importance of expeditious case disposal, the Court emphasized that achieving this within fixed deadlines is challenging given the high volume of pending cases.

CJI Chandrachud compared the Indian judiciary’s burden to that of the US Supreme Court, noting, "The number of cases we dispose of in 17 benches in a day is equivalent to what the US Supreme Court handles in an entire year. We cannot restrict access to this Court."

The plea, filed by Madan Gopal Agarwal, sought the speedy resolution of cases pending before the Supreme Court, High Courts, and lower courts. However, the Bench dismissed the petition, citing the unfeasibility of such a demand.

The issue of case pendency was also raised in a recent Supreme Court judgment, where Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B Varale noted that the apex court cannot compel High Courts to resolve cases within a set timeframe, as High Courts are not subordinate to the Supreme Court. 

Similar observations were made in February 2023, affirming that High Courts, as constitutional courts, function independently and are not administratively subordinate to the Supreme Court. In 2022, the Court had also rejected a plea challenging the working hours of the Bombay High Court during the COVID-19 pandemic, reaffirming that High Courts do not operate under the administrative control of the Supreme Court.

Case Title: Madan Gopal Agarwal v. Ministry of Law and Justice