Justice BV Nagarathna Flags Government‑Generated Judicial Backlog Speaking at the SCBA ’s first National Conference 2026 on “Reimagining Judicial Governance”, Justice BV Nagarathna warned that the state’s habit of filing routine appeals is a major driver of judicial pendency . She described a paradox: the government publicly decries backlog while simultaneously feeding it. Key Developments The state is the single largest generator of litigation, especially in service and taxation matters. Government officers file appeals as a precaution to avoid audit or political scrutiny, turning appeals into a routine. Insufficient investment in judicial infrastructure hampers capacity growth. Procedural practices – frequent adjournments , defective filings, and blanket stays – inflate case timelines. Justice Nagarathna proposes reforms: better case‑management, limited adjournments, adoption of technology, and a pragmatic government litigation policy. Important Facts Highlighted 1. Routine Appeals : Officers prefer appeals to avoid audit objections, pushing cases beyond lower courts to the Supreme Court. 2. Statistical Anomaly : Defective case files are counted in pendency statistics even before reaching a judge’s desk. 3. Procedural Delays : Service of notice evasion, delayed written statements, and misuse of Order V Rule 20 of CPC hinder progress. 4. Stay Orders : Though Order XLI Rule 5 CPC envisages conditional stays, courts frequently grant blanket stays, extending litigation. UPSC Relevance The discourse touches upon several GS papers. Understanding the state’s role as a litigant links to GS‑2 (Polity) –