Article On Court Managementsajms1

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/343828067
NEED OF THE COURT MANAGEMENT IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO
Article · August 2017
CITATIONS
READS
0
277
1 author:
Neelam Faizan
Jamia Millia Islamia
4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
All content following this page was uploaded by Neelam Faizan on 24 August 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

South -Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (SAJMS) ISSN:2349-7858:SJIF:2.246:Volume 4 291
NEED OF THE COURT MANAGEMENT IN THE
PRESENT SCENARIO
Neelam Faizan
Assistant Professor
Department Of Law
Aligarh Muslim University, Malappuram Centre, Kerala, India
ABSTRACT
We are well aware that the present judicial system is not able to cope with the flow of
litigation and there is no single reason behind it, but there are many reasons. Today, the
broader objective before the courts is to deliver justice to individuals without delay and at the
lower cost. One of the important aspects is that the functioning in the Courts today is based
more on traditions rather than principles of work efficiency. In the coming years the number
of new cases being filed is going to increase with the increase in literacy. As a consequence,
the subordinate judiciary should equip itself with managerial skills to cope not just with the
current backlogs but also for potential increase in number of cases in the future. In the
present scenario we cannot ignore the role of modern management methods and
technologies, which can be applied to the judicial system or in its functioning. The author in
this Article has discussed the problems of Indian judiciary and the need to improve the
management of courts in order to minimize the pendency of cases.
Keywords: Cases, Courts, Judiciary, Justice, Management, Pendency.
Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

INTRODUCTION
Pendency of court cases in India and it’s implication of denial of basic human right is a
question of efficiency and effectiveness as the way judicial proceeding takes place in the
country. Indian courts have large backlog of cases and it will take many years to clear the
backlog in Courts if system works with same efficiency.
The State is obligated to establish social order in which the legal system of the country
provides justice to all the citizens and access to justice irrespective of social, economic and
political barriers. Focusing on the judiciary, it won’t be false to state that it has gone through
various stages since the adoption of the Constitution in November, 1949. Till date, various
Reports on Judicial Reforms have been submitted by the Law Commissions, but most of the
important recommendations made by the Law Commissions, from time to time, have not
even been properly discussed, leave aside their implementation by the Government. This lack
of interest makes it imperative to propagate the recommendations made by the law
Commission which circled around the promotion of Court Management, Case Management
and improvement in the Administration of Justice. The introduction of management practices
in the judiciary has been a topic of discussion for quite some time now. During this period,
many ideas have been mooted to tackle the enormous backlog of pending cases. While some
of these ideas were implemented, others did not cross the stage of discussion and debate.
The Judiciary is alive to the shortcomings and ills facing it and, in order to keep
pace with time and changed circumstances, the implementation of the recommendations in
necessitated. For the same a proposal was placed before Hon’ble Chief Justice of India 2012
(Justice Altamas Kabir) emphasizing the need for a comprehensive “National Court
Management System” for the country that will enhance the quality, responsiveness and

timeliness of Court. Finally, Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, in consultation with Hon’ble
Minister of Law and Justice, Government of India, in 2012 directed that National Court
Management Systems, for enhancing timely justice, may be established. It has become
necessary to have an efficient court management system with respect to the workload of the
judiciary.
PROBLEMS OF INDIAN JUDICIARY IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO
In the Indian democratic society, for protecting and enhancing the rights of the people,
judiciary plays an important role besides legislative and executive body. For the
enforcement of rights of citizens and remedies thereto in case of violation thereof,
Courts have been established at all the level in the country. Supreme court by its decision
confirmed that the speedy trial is deemed as fundamental right included in Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Inspite of this, the condition is static and unchanged.
Amicus curiae and senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, said "When the
government says it respects the judiciary and its independence, there is a hidden line in it.
The courts are not being given importance that is why the justice dispensation system is in
such disarray,". However, it wanted to seek answers from the government on amicus curiae's
suggestion that access to justice must be made a constitutional right and consequently the
executive must provide necessary infrastructure for ensuring every citizen enjoyed this right.1
It is the commitment of every member of our judicial establishment to uphold the purity of
justice and to ensure its timely delivery to the millions who knock at their doors. There must
be efficiency of the court system and expanding the infrastructure to cope with the situation.2
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the matter of All India Judges Association v. Union of
India3, observed as under: -
“An independent and efficient judicial system is one of the basic structures
of our Constitution. If sufficient number of Judges are not appointed,
justice would not be available to the people, thereby undermining the
basic
1
Dhananjay Mahapatra, “Supreme Court chides itself, govt. for judicial backlog”, The Times of India ,
retrieved from http:r//timesofindia.indiatimes.com//articleshow/11456652.cms?intenttarget=no on January 15,
2012
2
K.G. Balakrishnan: JUDICIARY IN INDIA-PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS; Journal of Indian Law
Institute, vol.50, oct-dec 2008; p.461

3
2002 (4) SCC 247

structure………….Under the circumstances, we feel it is our

constitutional obligation to ensure that the backlog of the cases is
decreased and efforts are made to increase the disposal of cases. Apart
from the steps which may be necessary for increasing the efficiency of the
judicial officers, we are of the opinion that time has now come for
protecting one of the pillars of the Constitution, namely, the judicial
system, by directing increase, in the first instance, in the Judge
strength from the existing ratio of 10.5 or 13 per 10 lakhs people to 50
Judges for 10 lakh people. We are conscious of the fact that overnight
these vacancies cannot be filled. In order to have Additional Judges, not
only the post will have to be created but infrastructure required in the
form of Additional Court rooms, buildings, staff, etc., would also have
to be made available. We, therefore, first direct that the existing
vacancies in the subordinate Court at all levels should be filled, if possible,
latest by 31st March, 2003, in all the States……..Perhaps increasing the
Judge strength by 10 per 10 lakh people every year could be one of the
methods which may be adopted thereby completing the first stage within
five years before embarking on further increase if necessary.”
There are various problems with the judicial system of India which is increasing the workload
on it and as a result pendency rates are growing higher:
 Lack of Judges drives up pendency rates
Lack of judges is one of the causes of judicial backlog. Cases go on and on but no final
decision comes out. Many also misuse the system through the adjournments. Activist points
out that there is an urgent need to raise ratio of judges per million people current 11 to at least
50. 4
 Increase in the courts would not only help to reduce backlog
4
It is to be noted that at present in India, the ratio is 12 or 13 judges per million population where as 12 years
before it was about 41 judges in Australia, 75 in Canada, 51 in U.K. and 107 in United States. Due to this low
judge-population ratio, the courts are lacking requisite strength of judges to decide the cases.

Pendency is a normal feature of any system but is assuming great proportions in courts. This
will necessitate courts to prescribe time-limits for all cases. To deal with this, there can’t be
one prescribed limit, but the kinds of cases need to be identified and prioritized. So setting
time standards is essential and it will vary for different cases, and also for different courts
depending on their disposal-capacity. This will be necessary to assess the performance of the
courts and judicial accountability.5
 Accountability of Judges
In India, judiciary is a separate and independent system. Legislature and Executive are not
allowed by the Constitution to interfere in the functioning of judiciary. The courts on the
other hand check the acts of these two bodies. The judiciary is independent in India but it
doesn't mean that it is not accountable to anyone. There must be some judicial database that
includes the details about the specific laws which deals with subject matter, sections, legal
nature of disputes, time taken to decide the case, interim relief in operation and number of
adjournments etc.
 Provision of Adjournments
The main problem that resulted into pending cases is the adjournments granted by the court
on flimsy grounds. The conditions for adjournments are not strictly followed and the bad
practice continues not by litigants but by sitting judges also. It thwarted the right to speedy
trial of the concerned litigants. By granting regular adjournments the value of the time and
importance of the remedy sought for the cause of action also degraded with the time.
 Vacations for the Courts
The most debating question relating to the causes for pendency of cases is the vacations for
courts. On national level it is being argued that why the courts should have such long
vacations when there is such huge pendency of cases in all the courts waiting for disposal.
There is no provision for vacations for the courts in most of the countries like France & USA.
The judges in these countries can take leave according to the convenience without affecting
smooth functioning of courts.
 Endless amendment of laws
5
As per the 230th Law Commission’s Report submitted on August 5, 2009 under the Chairmanship of Dr.
Justice A R Lakshmanan,

Endless amendment of laws is another reason behind delay. Most of Indian laws were
amended time and again. As a result, it takes time to understand and explain the new
provisions of law. It kills valuable time of court. According to Late Mr. Nani A. Palkhivala,
the tragedy of India is the tragedy of wastage of national time, energy and manpower for
grappling with torrential countless amendments.
 Lack of case management
Lack of utilizing the applications of information technology for the case management. Same
procedural law and proceeding even for the trifling and low cause of action cases. Sometimes
the precious time of the court is wasted to decide the cases which can be decided through
other bodies. When the cases are being assigned then that time no consideration is given to
the expertise and specialization of judges. Normally it happens that the same judge has been
assigned civil as well as criminal cases which result into taking more time to understand the
facts and circumstance of the cases. This is one of the malpractices practices in most of the
high courts. By effective system of case management this problem can be curbed.
The above discussed are only few problems with the Indian judiciary. Present scenario
shows that the entire judicial system will collapse because of the reason of delay. Simple
steps like computerization of records would bring down corruption by 30% making it
difficult to use excuses like the file is "lost or damaged".
INCREASE IN WORKLOAD ON THE JUDICIARY
With the rapid growth in the industrial, technological field and population, workloads
have been increased on the judicial working system. With the increase of workload, the
efficiency of the courts is hampered badly. The judiciary day by day, due to its delayed
process losing faith of people to whom it is obliged to provide justice and it is in turn
creating big threat to constitutional and democratic governance of the county.
The Allahabad High Court is the largest high court but 50% of judges' posts are lying vacant.
It is an area of grave concern. People are getting more and more awareness of their rights and
want speedy justice. The courts cannot stop filing of cases on the ground that there are
vacancies.

Justice R. P. Sethi in Anil Rai vs. State of Bihar,6 laid down guidelines as not to delay in
pronouncement of judgment and observed that:
“in a country like ours where people consider judges second only to God, effort
should be made to strengthen that belief of the common man. Time has come for the judiciary
to assert itself to preserve its stature, respect and regard for the rule of law. ‘For the fault of
few’, the glorious and glittering name of the judiciary cannot be permitted to be made ugly.’’
Indian judicial system is not able to deliver the desired results and continues to
accumulate backlog largely attributed to "too much business for too few judges" 7; and of
old and outdated management practices. The judges are working with the same old set of
rules, which are in use for decades, and which do not accelerate the progress of the system.
The judges find themselves to be comfortable as 'case deciders'; they do not want to
participate in the change management, and sit on the drivers seat to take control over their
court and the pace of litigation, innovating and finding new ways of deciding case with
desired speed, without compromising with quality.
The Hon’ble SC in Hussainara Khatoon v/s. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, 8
held that speedy trial is a fundamental right implicit in the guarantee of life and personal
liberty enshrined in art. 21 of the Constitution and any accused who is denied this right of
speedy trial is entitled to approach Supreme Court under art. 32 for the purpose of enforcing
such right and this Court in discharge of its constitutional obligation has the power to give
necessary directions to the State Governments and other appropriate authorities for securing
this right to the accused.
Following recommendations have been given to cope up with the backlog of cases which
are as under:-
 Increase strength of judges

 Increase number of courts & staff.
 Take strict measure against corruption in Judiciary.
 Timely training for judicial staff.
 Opening up of Evening Courts.
 Reduce various types of holiday in Judiciary.
 Increase accountability of Judges and Advocates along with Investigating authority.
 Time bound disposal of cases according to various types of cases.
6
Criminal appeal of 6th August, 2001
7
77th Report of Law commission of India
8
(AIR 1979 SC 1360)

 Strict law and implementation.

 Minimal adjournments should be allowed on the merit of the case. Control over
adjournments.
 Encourage Alternative Dispute Resolutions i.e. Arbitration, Mediation
 Dedicated courts, tribunals for various types of cases.
 Shorten and simplify the procedure.
 Proper monitoring of the case.
 Introduction of E-filing
 Prioritization of old cases-“Five plus Zero” initiative must be adopted to ensure that
cases pending for more than 5 years are taken up on priority basis and such cases are
brought 2 down to zero level.
 Supervision of Court Managers: Judges are ultimately responsible for effective court
management. However, the complexity of the modern court requires the delegation of
administrative functions and responsibilities to the Court managers subject to the
supervision and direction of the Presiding Judge. Thus you must have effective control of
working of these Court Managers.
 Annual Confidential Reports: The Annual Confidential Reports of members of
Subordinate Judiciary must be maintained properly and on regular basis.
Study to find effect of backlog on Judges’ minds
The Centre has agreed to conduct a study to find how the 14,000-odd trial court Judges have
been psychologically impacted by the continuous struggle to fight off 2.77 crore pending
cases. Government announced that they are ready to sanction Rs 35 crore for a five-year
study to investigate the impact of pendency pressure on judicial officers and examine whether
it adversely impacted the output of trial court Judges. With the High Courts fixing minimum
disposal rate for trial court Judges in view of the huge pendency, judicial officers in district
courts are under a lot of pressure, given the inadequate infrastructure, to decide the minimum
required disposals.
Amicus curiae and senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, assisting a bench of Justices
A K Ganguly and T S Thakur in overall improvement of justice delivery system, had felt that
heavy work load for a long period of time could cause psychological pressure on the judicial
officers. Among other suggestions to the court for improving efficiency of justice delivery
mechanism, he had mooted a psychological study to analyze whether such pressure "ran
down the morale of the judge, his efficiency and ability and consequent loss of output."
MAXIMIZATION OF OUTCOME: NECESSITY OF TIME
As the term “management” itself suggests, it means judicious deployment of resources

including human resources for optimum output. For achieving maximum output in
minimum available time and with minimum resources at command, there is need to have a

motivated, disciplined and dedicated team. The team should share the collective objective of
the judicial system i.e. smooth functioning of the court and early disposal of cases, within the
available infrastructure and limited resources.
The emphasis now given to the values of economy, efficiency and effectiveness
have required the judiciary to accept changes in traditional procedures and institutional
structures. Perhaps the greatest challenge facing the administration of justice and the
legal profession is the establishment of a rational relationship between the resources
consumed in litigation and the value of what is at stake.
Not everything that counts can be counted. Some results or outcomes are incapable
of measurement. They can only be judged in a qualitative way. With respect to the legal
system, most of what matters cannot be measured at all. There is no measurable
performance indicator for quality of judicial decision making. The fairness of outcomes
and the fairness of procedures can be assessed but not Measured.
There is distinction between outputs and outcomes. For example, in the case of an
occupational health and safety inspectorate an “output” would be the number of inspections.
The “outcome” however, is the ultimate objective, such as a decline in rates of injury in the
workplace. Here, the outcome is the number of cases disposed of without delay.
Performance indicators for the courts focus on disposition of cases. Cases are a
measure of output. They are not a measure of outcome. The outcome of a judicial decision
making process can be variously stated. The administration of justice in accordance with law
is one. Another is the attainment of a fair result arrived at by fair procedures. Such
“outcomes” are not measurable. It has to be kept in mind that courts are not simply a publicly
funded dispute resolution process and that courts do not supply a consumer service to
litigants. Litigants are and ought be treated as citizens with rights, not as consumers with
needs.9
Court delays and performance against time standards, are not a measure of the
performance of judges. They measure the performance of a system in which judges have an
important, but not determinative, role. once an incentive system is put in place in an
9
See the Hon James J Spigelman “Seen to be Done: The Principal of Open Justice” 74 ALJ 290
378 esp 380-381; also my address “Citizens, Consumers and Courts” presented as the
International
Conference on Regulation Reform Management and Scrutiny of Legislation, Sydney, Australia, 9 July
2001 accessible at http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/sc.
organization, the behaviour in that organization does not depend so much on the motivation
which led to the system but depends to a large extent on the incentives alone. Such perverse
effects of performance indicators frequently occur in private corporations, especially when
remuneration is determined on the basis of performance.
Court Management: Need of the hour
“Court management” is inclusive of entire set of actions that a court takes to monitor and
control the progress of cases, from initiation of a case to trial. It is this lack of managerial
skills in the court administration, which has attributed to the current increase in pendency
rates of both civil and criminal matters. Here, the role of District Judge and Chief Judicial
Magistrate becomes utmost important for mechanizing effective court management system.
In their domain resides the daunting task of administrating court affairs, which will aid in
dispensing swift justice.10
An efficient Judge may not be a good administrator, so when a judicial officer is

appointed as Registrar, he may not have such managerial skills as the task requires because
he comes from a judicial background. Due to these types of bottlenecks there is delay, and the
result is reduced efficiency in the functioning of judiciary.
Court Management or Court case management forms a part of Judicial Administration

wherein, apart from the judges and their clerks there is Court administers who are to be
appointed to disseminate information on new methods and techniques of court administration.
They can have college and advanced degree, and many have attended law school.11
These Administers or Managers are involved in overseeing legislative budgets,

personnel administration, and court research and planning. Computers can also help in
reshaping the administration of the courts. With the integration of computers and database
software, case information can be recorded and retrieved electronically which would serve as
a boon to the system. The use of new technology would improve the efficiency of court
administration.12
Justice P. Sathasivam: Effective District Administration and Court Management; Article Published in 2014
10
SCC Vol. 1 January 14, 2014 Part 2 (2014) 1 SCC (J-25)
Dr Kamaljit Kaur: Court Management: Need of the hour; Volume-3, Issue-10, Oct-2014; ISSN No 2277 - 816
11
GLOBAL JOURNAL FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS , at p.82

12
ibid.

India has one of the largest judicial systems in the world – with over 3 crores of cases
and sanctioned strength of some 16,000 Judges which leads to 40 cases per judge in a single
day which is impossible. The system has expanded rapidly in the past so many years,
reflecting India’s social, economic and political development in this period. It is but obvious
that in the coming times disputes and litigation would only rise than decrease due to an
effective change in the social, moral and philosophical outlook of man. It is set to continue to
expand significantly over the next three decades, rising, by the most conservative estimate, to
at least about 15 crores of case requiring at least some 75,000 Courts/Judges. Also, there is
an urgent need to shorten the average life cycle of all cases – not only times pent within
each court, but also total time in the judicial system as a whole, to bring the average to
no more than about one to two years in each court. There are cases that are stretched over
decades and still the final verdict is not reached. The state of justice is strained in India. This
develops a dire need to systematically maintain and continuously seek to enhance quality and
responsiveness of justice. And, these challenges can only be addressed if there is a
substantial upgrading of court management systems in India. Still across the country, the
data on cases filed in the Indian judicial system is gathered and maintained in manual data
systems. Each month, considerable time is spent by local courts compiling data from manual
registers to submit reports to higher courts, which in turn leaves room for discrepancies and
inconsistencies and result is a lot of time consumption.
National Court Management Systems in India
In 2012, the then Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, S.H Kapadia, after consulting the Minister
of Law and Justice in the Government of India directed the establishment of National Court
Management Systems in India. The National Court Management Systems were proposed
to be under overall control of Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India. It will primarily deal with
policy issues. NCMS will include the following six main elements:
(1) A National Framework of Court Excellence (NFCE) would be set up, that will set
measurable performance standards for Indian courts, addressing issues of quality,
responsiveness and timeliness:
(2) A system for monitoring and enhancing the performance parameters established in the
NFCE on quality, responsiveness and timeliness would be established.

(3) A system of Case Management to enhance user friendliness of the Judicial System, via
technology would be incorporated.
(4) A National System of Judicial Statistics (NSJS) would be appointed to provide a

common national platform for recording and maintaining judicial statistics from across the
country. NSJS should provide real time statistics on case and courts that will enable
systematic analysis of key factors such as quality, timeliness and efficiency of the judicial
system across courts, districts/states, types of cases, stages of cases, costs of adjudication,
time lines of cases, productivity and efficiency of courts, use of budgets and financial
resources. It would enhance transparency and accountability.
(5) A Court Development Planning System would be assigned to provide a framework for
systematic five year plans for the future development of the Indian judiciary.
(6) A Human Resource Development Strategy would be considered which would be

standards on selection and training of judges of subordinate courts.
A model for setting up of a National Case Monitoring Authority which will deal with
the monitoring of the cases since its institution to implementation of verdict of the case was
also proposed. Despite of these proposals fewer action has been taken until now to work in
this direction.
NEED FOR TRAINING THE JUDGES AND THE STAFF
The law ministry, in the last quarter of 2013, “drafted a brief overview of legislative and
policy initiatives taken in the recent past to be taught at judicial academies in 22 states” 13The
measure was undertaken to help judges update their knowledge and further augment their
skills ‒ elements critical for improving the efficiency and productivity of the judiciary and
speedy delivery of justice. With several efforts underway to improve the justice delivery
system in our country, has come the awareness that quality of justice is dependent on the
performance of the judges, and that the performance can be enhanced only by properly and
continuously educating our judges.
An ideal situation would be for the law ministry to entrust the task to an expert
independent body comprising judicial educators. This would take care of the expertise
required to undertake an exercise of this nature and at the same time ensure the
13
“Govt. moves to enhance skills, attitude of judges”, The Times of India, Bhopal October 14, 2013.

independence of the judiciary. Apart from this, several other issues regarding judicial
education in our country need to be pondered and debated upon.
The Supreme Court in 1991 also gave directions to establish judicial academies in
every state14 but later withdrew these in 1993 when the government announced its decision to
establish the National Judicial Academy. The National Judicial Academy (NJA) was
established in 1993 at Bhopal.15As it was not possible to train all judges and other judicial
personnel at the NJA, the state governments on recommendation of their respective High
Courts established training institutes for judges in their states. Now all the states 16 in our
country except Tripura and Meghalaya have judicial academies, established to train their
subordinate judicial officers. All state judicial academies (SJAs) are actively functioning
except the recently established one in Manipur.
Not only that the Judges are to be trained, there is need for training the staff
members also. There is no systematic training for the staff members in the Subordinate
Judiciary. Presently, we do not have systematic training for staff members. For the system to
be efficient, systematic training of staff members is very much essential.
All that be required is to change our mindsets, and to make a beginning by making everyone
at all level responsible for implementation.
USE OF TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE THE WORKLOAD
Recent technological developments need to be harnessed and full utilization should be made
of modern gadgets, which are now easily accessible and at an affordable price.
14
In All India Judges’ Association vs. Union Of India (order dated 13/11/1991) AIR 1992 SC 165 Supreme
Court gave directions to all the states to establish in-service training institutes within one year from the date of
judgment or at any rate not later than 31-12-1992.
15
NJA is is an Indian government-funded training institute primarily for Judicial Officers, working in the
Supreme Court and the High Courts, during their service which was established on 17th August 1993 under the
Societies Registration Act, 1860. Between 1993 and 2000 it functioned with Delhi as headquarters and in
August 2000 a new campus at Bhopal was established. Established with the objectives of "Judicial Reform and
Policy Development as well as Research Support Services for greater efficiency, fairness, access and
productivity. It also includes improvements in court administration and management for a litigant friendly
justice system", the institute has been functioning as a "centre of excellence in judicial education, research and
training"
16
As Guwahati High Court is common High Court for states of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal
Pradesh, the Judicial Academy in Guwahati trains judges of all four States

Hoping against hope, Hon'ble Supreme Court has already taken some steps to avoid law's
delay. E-filing has been introduced in the Supreme Court on 2nd October, 2006. It is now
been made possible for any advocate-on-record or any other petitioner to file his matter
through internet from anywhere in the world. Computerization has also been introduced in
some of the High Courts in India.
Now, it is for each Court to plan out how best it can utilize the available gadgetry.
A few areas where changes can be brought about for the better are illustrated below:
 E-filing proforma, to be filled up when a case is filed. The form contains essential data
ready for scanning. A case-by-case database is built up, which can be drawn upon for
planning effective Court management procedures.
 Categorization of cases so that cases raising similar issues can be dealt with in one
group. This is particularly helpful in mass litigation or repetitive litigation.
 Creation of a website, enabling those having access to Internet to obtain necessary
information anytime.
 Online availability of essential judicial orders so that less time is spent in inspecting a
file for obtaining a copy of an order.
 Daily generation of information through computers indicating various reports and
documents.
 Video linkages, initially between the jail and the Court for routine matters. This is
estimated to annually save crores of rupees in Delhi alone.
This facility can be broad-based later on for recording testimony. Proper use of
technology cannot hurt anybody. On the contrary, it can only improve the efficiency of the
system and bring about greater transparency in its functioning. With the use of technology
and better Court management practices, the problems presently faced by all can be limited if
not eliminated.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN INDIA

Various recent developments are taking place in India to look into the matter of delay in justice
and to dispose of the cases as early as possible.
Top judges of the country met in 2015 to chalk out a National Vision Document 2015-2020 to
focus on financial autonomy for judiciary, fast-tracking of cases and strengthening vigilance cell

in district courts and high courts. CJI H L Dattu had made it clear long before the meeting to the
participating HC chief justices that they must come out with solutions to make the judiciary an
effective and speedy justice delivery mechanism. With over 3 crore cases pending in the three-tier
system, which is gasping because of inadequate number of judges both at the subordinate and
high court level, the top priority was to deal with arrears and delays. In many high courts, the
strength of judges has been increased, but there is no infrastructure court rooms and residences to
accommodate the additional judges. Consequently, the cases continue to pile despite high
disposal rate. "Infrastructure for judiciary was one of the top priority areas in the meeting."
One of the agenda for chalking out a solution was completing the task of complete
computerization of all courts, fast-tracking of cases relating to women, children and senior
citizens and strengthening the juvenile justice system.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi targeted what he described as "five-star activists

driving the judiciary" and asked judges to introspect on whether they were delivering on
their "divine" role in a manner that would safeguard the judicial system's credibility since
they can't be criticised by outsiders. He further said that "Do we need so many tribunals?
Their disposal rate is even more worrying. Are they delivering justice and, if not, have
they become just another barrier?" Their budget could be transferred to the courts, he
suggested.. 17
The project for the creation of e-courts is also going on which will facilitate
automatic disposal of cases within 30 days. This court which will be a part of the app will
act like a virtual courtroom where the police and the magistrate will perform all functions of
the law without being physically present. Also, in 2015 the Delhi High Court has become the
first court to set up dedicated commercial divisions within it to deal with disputes and also
to hear appeals, in line with the recommendation of the Law Commission of India. This move
will streamline civil judicial system and ensure speedy disposal of cases. Among the total of
four benches designated two benches will be e-courts, functioning as paperless courts. The
goal is not only to streamline the civil justice system but to ensure speedy disposal of cases
also. This shall also be advantageous in the reduction of backlog of commercial cases
which is the need of hour.18
17
PM Narendra Modi asks judiciary to avoid 'perception-driven' verdicts; Economic Times; New Delhi; April 6,
2015
18
HC 1st court to form commercial divisions; Times of India; 26 march,2015

Emphasizing the need to save the environment, a trial court has suggested framing of
guidelines to minimize use of papers in judicial work and instead use electronic form of
documents. The court said that with rapid advancement of technology, lawyers and litigants
should aim at using less paper and should bring documents in CDs or pen drives. Now, the time
has also come to have guidelines, instructions and rules to direct parties to bring only relevant
documents.
One of the recent developments is that the e-Courts Integrated Mission Mode Project
which is one of the National e-Governance projects is being implemented in District and
Subordinate Courts of the Country. The objectives of the project is to provide designated
services to litigants, lawyers and Judiciary through universal computerisation of district and
subordinate courts, as well as the upgradation of ICT infrastructure of the Supreme Court and
the High Courts.
The Supreme Court of India has taken a strong move to go for digitalization. The
Integrated Case Management Information System (ICMIS) will give access to the litigant so
that he/she can file a case digitally and track its status on a real-time basis. This steps aims to
make the higher court of the country paperless and later on to integrate this system with the
lower courts of the country. There will be many benefits of this:
 The transparency will be increased.

 Environmental benefits will be there by saving water, trees and costs.
 The process will become quick as any person can file the case online.
 It will reduce the cost as a person need not go to courts.
 At a time when a lot of cases are pending, this system can ease the process of
clearing the cases.
 Litigants, advocates and others can be updated through SMS and email about the
progress of case, next date of hearing, delivery of judgment etc.
CONCLUSION
We have seen previously that the case disposal rate has gone down compared to past and to
the other end more and more no of cases coming up in the courts, forums, tribunals etc. The
basic problem ailing India and the Indian Judiciary in particular is the fact that there
are a plethora of laws and commissions but unfortunately the implementation of them is
very weak. Off course having a management system in order to reduce the burden of the
Indian Courts is an excellent idea, but how well it would work in the Indian set up is still a

big question. With problems like Corruption, slow technology, to name amongst a few, it
would be hard to execute such an idea in India. Despite of all the problems in the Indian
System, the author believes that the implementation of this system may work out in the most
proficient way, in order to ensure the success and growth of the Indian Judicial System.
The main problem is that no one wants to go to the root of the problem. Even if
problems are identified then also no proper solution is chalked about. There is need for
recognition of court management as a concept and the need to include trained, skilled and
professional Court managers. In companies the target is to be achieved and in the same way
the target is to be fixed for the judiciary. The provision for the incentive must be there so that
the judges try to dispose of cases as early as possible. Even the concept of Judicial Impact
Assessment has been introduced in 2009 in regard to the expenses required. The workload
must be allotted accordingly and no court should be made burdensome. Now with the
technological advancement lot can be done to minimize the burdens on the Court but along
with it there is need to bring the change in the mindset of people associated with judiciary so
that they can adopt the technology to cope with the changing world.
REFERENCES
 Bryant G. Garth: Privatization and the New Formalism: Making the Courts Safe for Bureaucracy;
Source: Law & Social Inquiry,Vol. 13, No. 1 (Winter, 1988), pp. 157-174 (available at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/828712; Accessed: 16-04-2017)
 Doris Marie Provine and Carroll Seron: Privatization of Judicial Services; Source: Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART,Vol. 1, No. 3 (Jul., 1991), pp. 319-336
(available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/1181916; Accessed: 16-04-2017)
 Dr Kamaljit Kaur: Court Management: Need of the hour; Volume-3, Issue-10, Oct-2014; ISSN
No 2277 - 816 GLOBAL JOURNAL FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS
 Justice P. Sathasivam: Effective District Administration and Court Management; Article

Published in 2014 SCC Vol. 1 January 14, 2014 Part 2 (2014) 1 SCC (J-25)
 K.G. Balakrishnan: JUDICIARY IN INDIA-PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS; Journal of Indian

Law Institute, vol.50, Oct-Dec 2008; p.461
Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt Ltd
View publication stats

Article On Court Managementsajms1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article On Court Managementsajms1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

NEED OF THE COURT MANAGEMENT IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO

Article · August 2017

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

NEED OF THE COURT MANAGEMENT IN THE

Aligarh Muslim University, Malappuram Centre, Kerala, India

Keywords: Cases, Courts, Judiciary, Justice, Management, Pendency.

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

PROBLEMS OF INDIAN JUDICIARY IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

structure………….Under the circumstances, we feel it is our

 Lack of Judges drives up pendency rates

 Increase in the courts would not only help to reduce backlog

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 Vacations for the Courts

 Endless amendment of laws

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 Lack of case management

INCREASE IN WORKLOAD ON THE JUDICIARY

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 Increase strength of judges

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 Strict law and implementation.

Study to find effect of backlog on Judges’ minds

MAXIMIZATION OF OUTCOME: NECESSITY OF TIME

As the term “management” itself suggests, it means judicious deployment of resources

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

Court Management: Need of the hour

An efficient Judge may not be a good administrator, so when a judicial officer is

Court Management or Court case management forms a part of Judicial Administration

These Administers or Managers are involved in overseeing legislative budgets,

SCC Vol. 1 January 14, 2014 Part 2 (2014) 1 SCC (J-25)

GLOBAL JOURNAL FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS , at p.82

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

National Court Management Systems in India

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

(4) A National System of Judicial Statistics (NSJS) would be appointed to provide a

(6) A Human Resource Development Strategy would be considered which would be

NEED FOR TRAINING THE JUDGES AND THE STAFF

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

USE OF TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE THE WORKLOAD

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN INDIA

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

Prime Minister Narendra Modi targeted what he described as "five-star activists

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 The transparency will be increased.

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt

 Justice P. Sathasivam: Effective District Administration and Court Management; Article

 K.G. Balakrishnan: JUDICIARY IN INDIA-PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS; Journal of Indian

Copyright © Universal Multidisciplinary Research Institute Pvt Ltd

View publication stats

You might also like