**Executive Summary**
This document is a response to Unstarred Question No. 1143 in Lok Sabha regarding the establishment of permanent Constitutional/Regional Benches of the Supreme Court. The response, given by the Minister of State for Law and Justice, addresses the feasibility of establishing such benches and the status of related proposals, including the establishment of a National Court of Appeal. The response also provides data, current as of November 26, 2025, on the number of cases involving constitutional interpretation pending for over five years.
**Key Points / Main Content**
* **Constitutional Basis for Supreme Court Location:**
* Article 130 of the Constitution allows the Supreme Court to sit in Delhi or other locations as appointed by the Chief Justice of India with the President's approval.
* **Historical Recommendations for Benches:**
* Various representations and reports, including the Eleventh and Eighteenth Law Commissions, have suggested establishing regional benches of the Supreme Court.
* **Rejection of Regional Benches:**
* The Chief Justice of India and the Full Court, in a meeting on February 18, 2010, found no justification for setting up benches of the Supreme Court outside Delhi.
* **National Court of Appeal (NCA):**
* The Supreme Court referred the issue of establishing a National Court of Appeal to a Constitutional Bench for authoritative pronouncement.
* This matter is currently sub-judice.
* **Pending Cases with Constitutional Interpretation:**
* As of November 26, 2025, the number of cases involving constitutional interpretation pending for more than five years is:
* Five-Judge Bench: 10
* Seven-Judge Bench: 03
* Nine-Judge Bench: 02
**Impact Analysis**
**Stakeholder: Government**
* **Impact:** The Government must continue to monitor the status of the sub-judice matter regarding the National Court of Appeal and be prepared to act upon the Constitutional Bench's pronouncement.
* **Action Required:** Await the decision of the Constitutional Bench regarding the National Court of Appeal and formulate any necessary policy or legislative actions.
**Stakeholder: Supreme Court/Chief Justice of India**
* **Impact:** The Supreme Court's existing stance against regional benches remains in effect, and the Constitutional Bench is tasked with providing an authoritative pronouncement on the National Court of Appeal.
* **Action Required:** Continue managing pending cases, including those involving constitutional interpretation, and proceed with the referral to the Constitutional Bench regarding the NCA.
**Stakeholder: Litigants/Public**
* **Impact:** Access to justice may be perceived to be affected by the decision on whether to establish regional benches or a National Court of Appeal.
* **Action Required:** No direct action, but they are indirectly affected by decisions regarding court structure and accessibility.
**Stakeholder: Law Commission**
* **Impact:** Prior recommendations from the Law Commission are being considered in the context of ongoing deliberations regarding the structure of the Supreme Court.
* **Action Required:** No direct action.
Key Entities Referenced
Supreme Court: India's highest court, the focus of the proposed establishment of regional benches.
Law Commission: Recommending body for legal reforms, referred to regarding suggestions for a National Court of Appeal and splitting of the Supreme Court.
Article 130 of the Constitution of India: Constitutional provision regarding the sitting places of the Supreme Court.
National Court of Appeal (NCA): A proposed court to reduce the burden on the Supreme Court, recommended by the Law Commission.
Delhi: Location of the principal seat of the Supreme Court and a potential location for a Constitutional Bench.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
LOK SABHA
UNSTARRED QUESTION NO. 1143
TO BE ANSWERED ON FRIDAY, THE 05.12.2025
Establishment of Constitutional/Regional Benches of Supreme Court
1143 Shri Kalyan Banerjee:
Will the Minister of Law and Justice be pleased to state:
(a) whether the Government proposes to establish permanent Constitution/Regional
Benches of the Supreme Court to improve access to justice, if so, the details
thereof;
(b) the reasons for non-implementation and/or delaying of setting up such
benches, if any, and proposal to establish a National Court of Appeal (NCA) as
recommend by Law Commission; and
(c) the number of cases involving constitutional interpretation pending for more
than five years thereof ?
ANSWER
MINISTER OF STATE (INDEPENDENT CHARGE) OF THE MINISTRY
OF LAW AND JUSTICE; AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY
OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS
(SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL)
(a) & (b): Article 130 of the Constitution of India provides that the Supreme Court
shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places as the Chief Justice of India may,
with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint.
2. Representations have been received from time to time from various quarters
for establishment of Benches of Supreme Court in various parts of the Country. The
Eleventh Law Commission in its 125th Report titled “The Supreme Court - A Fresh
Look”, submitted in 1988, reiterated the recommendations made by Tenth Law:2:
Commission in its 95th Report for splitting the Supreme Court into two namely (i)
Constitutional Court at Delhi and (ii) Court of Appeal or Federal Court sitting in
North, South, East, West and Central India. The Eighteenth Law Commission in its
229th Report submitted in 2009 had also suggested that a Constitutional Bench be
set up at Delhi and four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern region at
Delhi, Southern region at Chennai/Hyderabad, Eastern region at Kolkata and
Western region at Mumbai.
3. The matter was referred to the Chief Justice of India, who informed that after
consideration of the matter, the Full Court in its meeting held on 18th February,
2010, found no justification for setting up of benches of the Supreme Court outside
Delhi. The Chief Justice of India had earlier conveyed similar views in August,
2007.
4. In Writ Petition WP(C) No. 36/2016 on establishment of National Court of
Appeal, the Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 13.07.2016 deemed it proper to
refer the aforementioned issue to Constitutional Bench for authoritative
pronouncement. The matter is currently sub-judice in the Supreme Court.
(c): As per the information received from the Supreme Court of India,
the number of cases involving constitutional interpretation pending for more than
five years, as on 26.11.2025, are as follows:
(i) Five-Judge Bench: 10
(ii) Seven-Judge Bench: 03
(ii) Nine-Judge Bench: 02
***