On Monday(27th May),Economist Shamika Ravi’s analysis suggests even minor changes to the Supreme Court’s schedule could notably enhance judicial output. As a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, Ravi underscores the findings of a comprehensive 2019 study, emphasizing the potential for improvement over seven decades.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
DELHI: On Monday(27th May), Economist Shamika Ravi made a noteworthy revelation, indicating that modest adjustments to the Supreme Court‘s schedule could significantly enhance judicial output. Ravi, a distinguished member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, brought attention to a crucial 2019 study that analyzed the Supreme Court’s productivity over nearly seven decades, from 1950 to 2019.
The study, co-authored by Ravi and Professor Mudit Kapoor, provides a meticulous analysis, indicating a potential increase in judgment output had the Supreme Court worked additional days.
“Our analysis indicates that if the proportion of judgement days had increased by just 10%, the Supreme Court could have passed approximately 14,359 additional judgements,”
– the authors noted.
This adjustment translates to an approximate 28% increase in the total number of judgments passed since the inception of the court in 1950.
Interestingly, the research also highlights the fluctuating productivity levels of the court over the years. It observed an improvement from 1990 to 2010 compared to the preceding decade, but a noticeable decline post-2010.
ALSO READ: “Undemocratic” Collegium System Will Be Scrapped by BJP-Led NDA: Ex-Union Minister Kushwaha
The study clarifies-
“The empirical analysis suggests that the number of judgements per day is mainly affected by the proportion of judgement days under a particular Chief Justice of India (CJI), with no significant evidence indicating that increased bench strength has a notable impact on the daily number of judgements.”
This academic insight came into the spotlight following remarks earlier this month by another PM-EAC member, economist Sanjeev Sanyal. Sanyal criticized the working hours and the lengthy vacation periods of the Supreme Court and High Courts during a podcast episode of Prachayam. His comments sparked considerable debate, eliciting responses from various quarters of the legal community.
“The High Courts and the Supreme Court observe leave during the summer and again during Dussehra. What kind of system is this? They only work for a few hours.”
-he questioned, prompting a rebuttal from the legal fraternity.
Responding to these criticisms, Sriram Panchu, a senior advocate and noted mediator, defended the judges’ work ethic.
“Judges read case papers before coming to court, they dictate orders, and correct them after court hours. And weekends just mean work in the home office,”
-he emphasized, shedding light on the rigorous nature of judicial duties in India.
“I have visited courts worldwide and interacted with lawyers and judges, and it is safe to say that Indian judges are amongst the hardest working anywhere, and their caseloads are far heavier than anywhere else,” he affirmed, highlighting the demanding workload faced by Indian judges compared to their counterparts globally.
Furthering this discourse, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Dipankar Datta, during a session of the Vacation Bench, expressed his discontent with the critiques directed at the judiciary’s working hours.
ALSO READ: BREAKING | 1st National Lok Adalat Announced by Supreme Court from July 29 to August 3
“Very unfortunately, despite judges’ diligent efforts, there’s a perception that they work for only a few hours. Those making such claims are often part of the governing bodies; it’s worth noting that not a single case filed by the Union (government) or others is filed within the prescribed time limit. Each case requires a condonation of delay application. Those criticizing the judiciary should consider this. We work tirelessly, even burning the midnight oil during vacations,” he expressed, underscoring the misconception surrounding judges’ working hours and their commitment to their responsibilities.
-Justice Datta asserted.
