Kerala High Court Constitutes Committee To Address Infrastructural Deficiencies In Mediation Centres In State

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V M were considering a suo motu petition concerning the infrastructural requirements of mediation centres, including the adequate support staff and regular office stationary.

The Court noted that Kerala currently has 82 mediation centres, including the High Court ADR Centre, 14 District Mediation Centres, two Additional District Mediation Centres, and 65 Mediation Sub Centres.

Reports placed before the Court by Mediation Centres revealed that a majority of these centres lack physical and digital infrastructure, were unabile to conduct online meditation because of lack of internet connectivity or video linkage equipment etc. It was further revealed that there is a lack of even basic amenities such as permanent rooms, privacy for parties, adequate seating, drinking water, toilets, fans, and waiting areas.

When the matter was considered on December 1 last year, the Court had directed that a joint meeting of the Registrar General, Member Secretary, Kerala State Legal Service Authority, the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department; the Law Secretary, State of Kerala; and the Director, Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre, be convened.

Based on this meeting, a priority list identifying the Mediation Centres requiring immediate intervention was prepared.

The Court took note of submissions that both the Kerala State Legal Services Authority and the State Mediation and Conciliation Centre lack sufficient funds to meet essential infrastructural and staffing requirements. It was informed that proposals are being initiated through the Public Works Department for renovation and construction of mediation facilities, along with plans to seek dedicated budgetary allocations and create permanent posts, including nodal officers at mediation sub-centres.

The Court also took note of the Report submitted by the Amicus Curiae, which highlighted severe deficiencies affecting the functioning of mediation centres statewide, which include the lack of basic amenities like fans, separate washrooms for men and women and water purifiers. The lack of digital infrastructure was also highlighted.

In many centres. particularly in remote areas such as Peerumedu, Idukki and Nedumkandam, there is reportedly zero availability of computers, printers, internet connectivity, or digital infrastructure. Even some urban centres, including Ettumanoor, were found to be operating without basic furniture or equipment, despite having multiple mediators attached

The Bench observed that the lack of proper physical space and privacy undermines the very foundation of mediation, especially in sensitive matters such as matrimonial disputes. The absence of child-friendly waiting areas was also flagged as a serious concern, with the Court noting that it adversely affects the participation of litigants attending mediation with young children.

The Court took note that only the High Court Mediation Centre has an online facility and in other centres, when online mediation is required, mediators and parties participate through their mobile phones.

“Each Mediation Centre requires a dedicated room equipped with video conferencing facility, including a computer, camera, and sound system. In centres located on upper floors without lifts or ground-floor cubicles, differently-abled persons and senior citizens face difficulty in attending mediation sessions.” the Court ordered.

Emphasising that mediation is a key pillar for dispute resolution and addresses pendency reduction, the Court said that its success depends not only on trained mediators or judicial referrals but also on the environment in which mediation is conducted.

“The success of mediation does not solely depend on the number of references made by the judges or the skill of the mediators, but also depends on the space where mediation takes place. The importance of physical space where mediation takes place is not given its due recognition. Without proper rooms, without privacy, effective mediation can face serious challenge.” Court noted

The Court further observed that the failure to ensure proper confidentiality impedes the mediation process and the parties move away from effectively participating in mediation for want of privacy.

To ensure effective coordination and monitoring, the Court directed the constitution of a “Mediation Infrastructure Committee” comprising senior officials, including the Registrar General of the High Court, Law Secretary, Principal Secretary (PWD), Additional Chief Secretaries of the Home and Finance Departments, and key officials from the Legal Services Authority and Mediation Centre. The Committee will meet at least once every two months and place its reports before the Court

The Director of the Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre has been appointed as the Coordinator of the Committee and has been granted liberty to approach the Court if further judicial intervention becomes necessary.

The matter is posted for further consideration on 02 March.

Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Ors

Case No: WP(C) 42844/ 2025

Counsel for Respondents: O M Shalina (DSGI), Shibi K P, Leo Lukose, Ramola Nayanpally

Amicus Curiae: Adarsh Kumar