Answer: Supreme Court recently expressed dismay over the delay in the appointment of judges. As per the data from the Integrated Case Management System (ICMIS), there are 69,766 cases pending in the Supreme Court in July 2023.

Implications of delay in Judicial Appointments

• Increased Workload: Existing judges have to handle more cases than they can manage effectively, leading to slower proceedings and delayed judgments. 
• Each judge handles between 2,000-4,000 cases a year.
• Postponed Hearings: With fewer judges, court dates get postponed. This causes postponement of cases adding to the pendency of cases.
• Impact on Access to Justice: Delayed appointments hinder people's access to justice, as cases take longer to resolve, causing frustration and discouraging faith in the legal system.
• According to a Niti Aayog strategy paper, at the then-prevailing rate, it would take more than 300 years to clear the backlog of Indian judiciary.

• Lack of capable candidates: Lack of judges along with the risk of capable candidates withdrawing their names due to delays in judicial appointments can hamper timely and fair case management.

•  Recently, SC expressed distress over the situation, emphasizing the urgency in clearing 70 judicial appointments recommended by various High Courts and the Supreme Court.
• Inefficient Use of Resources: Courtrooms and resources remain underutilized due to the shortage of judges, contributing to inefficiencies in the overall functioning of the judicial system.
• There is a requirement of 50 judges for every 10 lakh population in the country, but India has only 21 judges per million people.

Recommendations wrt Judicial Appointments

• Supreme Court in 1992, in All India Judges’ Association v. The Union of India, directed the Centre to set up an All India Judicial Service to address the issue of delayed appointments and improve the overall functioning of the judiciary by establishing a standardized selection process for judges. This idea was also backed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee in 2006 to help create a pool of talented people.
• Fifteenth Finance Commission and the India Justice Report 2020 suggested ways to earmark and deploy funds with adequate budgeting for appointments and improvements.
• Law Commission emphasized the importance of including more women judges to address social imbalances in the judiciary. It also recommended increasing the number of judges to 50 per million people. 
• Economic Survey 2018-19 recommends to increase number of working days, and establishment of Indian Courts and Tribunal Services to focus on the administrative aspects of the legal system.
• Malimath Committee suggested reducing Supreme Court vacations due to high pending cases. It also advocated for alternative dispute resolution mechanisms as an effective substitute for traditional court proceedings.

Delay in judicial appointments casts an array of distrust over the efficacy of the Indian judiciary. This calls for holistic and realistic view of the present situation of the Indian Judiciary to maintain the rule of law and delivering good governance.