According to the Official Memorandum of 4 April, entitled “Directive for Effective and Effective Court of Court of Court, the Ministry also planned to create a new data portal for arbitration matters where the government is based on the current national judiciary (NJDG) for court cases.
NJDG provides the number of waiting and resolved cases in Indian courts. The data is compiled by the government from individual courts.
The Ministry of Law stated that new legal cells should be created in ministries and departments within three months. These legal cells may be designed according to the case of the ministry or ministry concerned, the Ministry of Law said.
Also read | Nhai seeks to reduce arbitration fees by lapping in more retirement judges
The Ministry of Law also asked for a node that is not under the rank of a common secretary to be appointed to supervise the dispute matters. This officer should also have expertise in the legal field and reasonable experience for this position, the Ministry of Law said.
This note also called for young lawyers to engage on a contractual basis whenever necessary. He also called for an independent review of court disputes on new politicians to be introduced in the future.
The Ministry of Law also supported advice in June 2024 by the Ministry of Finance in order to reduce government relying on arbitration due to its high expenditure and long time frames for resolutions.
The Memorandum published by the Ministry of Law states that the aim of the Directive is to reduce recurring litigation, reduce problems in orders and announcements issued by the government, reduce unnecessary appeal against court decisions and focus on out -of -court dispute resolution methods such as mediation.
Read it | GOVT seeks to change the law to strengthen institutional arbitration
The memorandum stressed that most ministries and departments in the Central Government did not set any standard operating procedures for resolving litigation.
“Most ministries and departments do not have a reserved legal cell, and cases are solved by administrative or technical divisions that oversee the subject,” she said about limiting the capacity of legal matters in the Central Government.
The Ministry of Law also analyzed data on lawsuits across ministries and found that most of the questions were repeated. These issues are associated with services or pensions, acquisition of land and compensatory disputes, business disputes, intellectual property disputes, violations of fundamental rights and disputes of public interest (Pil), as an IS interpretation of tax laws, the ministry said.
The ministry also stressed that the government’s disputes with contractual partners and concessionaries arise from basic contractual disputes, where one party does not comply with contractual agreements, and said there must be more coordination between ministries.
Also read | The Supreme Court could transform the arbitration proceedings. Businesses follow.
The involvement in the maneuvers of building capacities in ministries to reduce government litigation is unlikely to help the problem completely, said Alok Prasanna, co -founder, Center for Vishi Legal Policy (VCLP). “The basic problem and problem that these instructions do not deal with is the lack of consequences for the administration of frivolous cases,” he said.
The problem that Pránna mentioned was the government that expands legal challenges because no government official wants to bear the consequences of loss of the case. “When the individual gives frivolous cases, the consequences are usually personally personally, while for governments, it is a taxpayer who excludes the costs. Very rarely, it rarely requires the personnel costs of government employees for filing frivolous cases,” Prasanna said.
The non -connection of the appeal in lost cases is considered unacceptable to government officials and receives harsh comments from the authority of the administrator and the general auditor (CAG), he added.
The providers of referees and mediation services also agreed that a fundamental change in thinking is necessary and that building capacities is only the beginning of the solution.
Also read | Central Plans to Revive IIAC, adds incentives for naval arbitration and msmes
“The government that has massive exposure to court proceedings requires a shift in its approach to legal matters. If the official in the legal department always works with the intention of lawsuits and assaults, then the construction of capacities will not be a solution,” said Modi, founding partner and manager for strategy and innovation, Presolv360.
“If more officers try to focus on a resolution instead of a lawsuit, the government could not only significantly reduce the burden of its limited resources, but also reduce its contribution to the trailer,” he added.
The government should also minimize the adjournment and if the government bodies require two adjournment, then the reason should be taken to the legal cell of the Ministry or the Ministry.
Although the government sought to mediate as a method of resolving government litigation, it clearly avoided the arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. The Ministry of Law stated that it would be decided to resolve disputes over disputes about a case from a case from a case.
Given that the new government arbitration data that will soon enter into disintegration, the government is likely to look for referees from two places, either from the judges or from individual ministries.
Read it | Call to reduce the court intervention in the amendment to arbitration, as the consulting window closes
Since 2017, after a report on the Committee with Judge BN Srikrishn at a high level, which promotes institutional arbitration over ad-hoc referees, the government has fired for it. However, finding data from arbitration institutions may be a challenge, and ad-hoc arbitration is still a preferred method of dispute resolution in the country and the government does not officially recognize any arbitration institution.
However, the Ministry of Law has asked the ministries to carry out a regular review of all judges, whether domestic or international, and to disclose the review of the Ministry of Legal Affairs.
“The vast majority of concluded contracts have standard arbitration provisions and generally do not mention institutional arbitration. The collection of data is the first step, but the terms of contracts will have to change to order institutional institutional arbitration,” Prasanna of VCLP.
However, the Indian arbitration procedure is slowly moving towards institutions, far from the practices of ad hoc. “The institutional arbitration has recently been a preferred choice, and recently we have seen it tend to do it,” said Gauhar Mirza, partner of Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
“Given that the government itself has established an institution for arbitration and, in particular, some institutions, such as the International Referee in the Delhi, we can see a clear trend,” he said.
And read | Stipé by the Ministry of Finance, onGC to limit the arbitration procedure, use IIAC services
(Tagstotranslate) National Judgments
