Skip to main content

Setback to grassroots justice: Govt of India "backtracks" on village-level courts

By A Representative
A draft report, prepared by an Ahmedabad-based NGO, Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), has alleged that, in a major setback to an important social sector scheme in India, the momentum for setting up the Gram Nyayalayas -- village courts -- has been lost, and there is a clear sense of “lack of ownership” about the scheme across India’s governing institutions.
The report has been prepared following a field visit by CSJ volunteers. It says, “Our field visits in Madhya Pradesh in the districts of Sagar, Katni, Panna, Bhopal and Itarsi show that while the Gram Nyayalayas have been notified, they do not function. Instead of appointing new staff, the existing courts have been designated as Gram Nyayalayas.”
A senior activist, who is in the midst of preparing the report, said, the attitude of the Government of India can be gauged from the fact that in Gujarat, under Narendra Modi’s chief ministership (2001-14), not a single Gram Nyayalaya was set up. “In fact, during an internal meeting, Modi stated, there is no need for Gram Nyayalaya as the state’s rural areas are becoming urbanized”, the activist informed Counterview.
The decision to set up Gram Nyayalayas was formally floated in 2009 following the enactment of Gram Nyayalaya Act, 2008, which focused on setting up of another wrung of judiciary at the village level under the Department of Justice. “The purpose behind enacting the legislation was to provide legal support to the grassroots for purposes of providing access to justice”, the report says.
Quoting a starred question in Parliament to prove its point, the CSJ report says, the process of setting up Gram Nyayalayas has been “slowed down”, and a decision has already been taken at the highest level “to merge the scheme with regular infrastructure development schemes of the judiciary.”
Starred Question dated December 4, 2014, quoted in the report also adm,its, “The progress of setting up Gram Nyayalaya has been very slow due to factors like non-appointment of Nyaya Adhikari, lack of cooperation from various stake holders, concurrent jurisdiction of regular courts and non-availability of lawyers and notaries.”
The decision to “merge” the Gram Nayayalikas into infrastructure schemes of judiciary was also taken, the report says, because the Government of India reached the conclusion that “majority of states now have regular taluka level courts”, the CSJ report states.
Quoting budget estimates for 2014-15, the report says, they too clearly suggest that “the scheme for setting up Gram Nyayalayas has been merged with the centrally sponsored scheme for infrastructure development for judiciary.”
“The payment for setting up Gram Nyayalayas was to follow a pattern: It was Rs 18 lakh as the setting up cost per Gram Nyayalaya and Rs 3.20 lakh as recurring costs per court”, the report states. Thus, while the reply to the Starred Question (No 170) said on December 4, 2014 that in all Rs 499 lakh was allocated for Gram Nyayalikas, a Press Information Bureau (PIB) release says, as on March 9, 2015 the total amount allocated was just Rs 101 lakh.
There is also discrepancy in the number of Gram Nayalayas operationalized, the report says. Thus, while the PIB states that as many as 194 Gram Nyayalayas as on March 9, 2015 had been operationalized, a reply to a right to information (RTI) query, as on April 6, 2015, said that the number of Gram Nyayalayas that have been operationalized is 159.
The “indifference” stands in sharp contrast to the previous UPA government’s announcement that the amount being allocated towards setting up Gram Nyayalayas had being increased by 75 percent, the report says, adding, the effort appears to be underway to undermine “participatory justice” that is more user friendly and is meant for the vulnerable sections.

Comments

TRENDING

How strategic is India's commercial expansion in the Mediterranean?

By Vijay Prashad  On 26 October 2026, Greece’s foreign minister George Gerapetritis stood at the United Nations headquarters and rejected the maritime agreement between Turkey and Libya. Gerapetritis spoke on behalf of Greece of course, but also Bahrain, Cyprus, Egypt, the European Union, and the United Arab Emirates. Five days later, the Indian frigate INS Trishul entered Souda Bay in Crete as part of activities with the US Navy installation (Naval Support Activity) and with the NATO Maritime Interdiction Operational Training Centre. The sequence illuminates a developing strategic geography: India’s naval reach, its confrontation with Pakistan’s new Turkish partner, and its ambition to connect Indian capital to European markets increasingly converge in the eastern Mediterranean.

Letter to Modi seeks cancellation of "coercive" anti-NGO order on foreign funding rules

By A Representative  Around 70 civil rights organizations have come together to strategize “a collective response to the stifling of civil society space” in the wake of the recent Government of India clampdown on NGOs, telling Prime Minister Narendra Modi that government steps are “coercive” in nature, are “without reasonable cause or due process”, and seek to “cripple” the ability of NGOs to “carry on their legitimate and sanctioned work.”

The Modi-Adani relationship: Corporate power, political proximity and accountability

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan   India's economic transformation over the past decade has been marked by ambitious infrastructure projects, increased global investment and the emergence of powerful corporate conglomerates. Alongside this growth, however, concerns about crony capitalism, the concentration of economic power and the influence of political connections on business opportunities have become increasingly prominent.