All India Judges Association vs Union Of India

I. PREFACE................................................................................2 II. FACTUAL POSITION................................................................4 a. Concept of “Court Managers” from the Report of FC-XIII......4 b. Letter by the Finance Ministry dated 20 th September 2010...5 c. Letter by Finance Ministry dated 10th July 2013................10 d. Judgment of this Court in the present proceedings dated 2 nd August 2018............................................................................11 e. Report of the SNJPC dated 4th February, 2022....................12 f. Filing of the present IAs and the Writ Petition...................17 III. SUBMISSIONS....................................................................18 IV. ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION..............................................22 V. ANALYSIS..............................................................................23 VI. CONCLUSION.....................................................................32

JUDGMENT

B.R. GAVAI, CJI

I. PREFACE

1. This matter involves a peculiar issue concerning the

situation of Court Managers, who were introduced by the

Thirteenth Finance Commission (2010-2015) to enhance the

efficiency of court management by providing administrative

support to the judges resulting in improved case disposal.

2

2. One Court Manager Welfare Association has filed an

application being I.A. No.187240 of 2024 seeking

intervention. Further, I.A. No.187237 of 2024 has been filed

by the applicant, inter alia seeking directions to bring

uniformity and enhancement in the service conditions of

Court Managers across India by granting them a higher pay

scale with appropriate allowances as recommended by the

Second National Judicial Pay Commission1. The applicant

also seeks recognition of Court Managers as Class I Gazetted

Officers, regularization of those still on a contractual basis,

and consideration of their past continuous service for

pensionary and monetary benefits. It further prays for the

directions from this Court that would result in framing of

uniform rules for career progression and promotions, along

with the formulation of a structured duty roster outlining

their roles, responsibilities, and delegated authority to ensure

efficient judicial administration.

3. Another application being I.A. No. 135045 of 2023 has

been filed by Sachin Kumar Gupta and others seeking

intervention and directions to expedite the proceedings of LPA

1 “SNJPC” for short.

3 1951 of 2019 pending adjudication before the High Court of

Punjab and Haryana and to direct the Union of India to

absorb/regularise the services of the intervenors for the post

of Court Manager in the State of Punjab, Haryana and Union

Territory of Chandigarh.

4. Lastly, one writ petition being W.P. (C) 301 of 2024 has

been filed by Lokesh Kumar and another seeking similar

reliefs as sought in I.A. No.187237 of 2024.

II. FACTUAL POSITION a. Concept of “Court Managers” from the Report of FC-XIII

5. The concept of “Court Managers” was first proposed by

the Thirteenth Finance Commission (2010-2015). The

Thirteenth Finance Commission (FC-XIII) report

recommended thus:

"12.87 Creation of posts of court managers:

Enhancing the efficiency of court management would result in improving case disposal. Providing support to judges for performing their administrative duties would allow them more time for their judicial functions. Adopting an innovative approach, the Department of Justice has proposed that professionally qualified Court Managers, with MBA degrees, be employed to assist judges. These Court Managers will also be useful in feeding the proposed National Arrears Grid that would be set up to monitor disposal of cases in all the courts. We

4 support this innovation, the impact of which may be evaluated after 2015. The post of a Court Manager would be created in each judicial district to assist the Principal, District and Sessions judges in the administrative functioning of the courts. Similarly, posts of two Court Managers may be created for each High Court and one for each bench of the High Court. This is estimated to require Rs. 60 crore per year and works out to Rs. 300 crore for the period 2010-15. These amounts have been allocated to the states in proportion to the number of judicial districts in their jurisdiction."

6. It can thus be seen that the Thirteenth Finance

Commission had recommended the creation of the post of

Court Managers with the aim of providing assistance to

judges in performing their administrative duties. It was

proposed that the Court Managers would be appointed at

both the District Court/Sessions Court level as well as the

High Court level. It also records the estimation and allocation

of funds required for the remuneration and other expenditure

which is to be incurred by the States for appointing such

Court Managers.

b. Letter by the Finance Ministry dated 20th September 2010

7. Pursuant thereto, a letter (No. F 32(30) FCD/2010)

dated 20th September 2010 came to be addressed by the

5 Director, Finance Commission Division, Department of

Expenditure, Ministry of Finance to the Secretary,

Department of Justice, seeking implementation of the

recommendations given by the Thirteenth Finance

Commission (FC-XIII). The said letter was accompanied by

“Guidelines for release and utilization of Grant-in-aid for the

Improvement in Justice Delivery as recommended by the

Thirteenth Finance Commission”. The relevant portion of the

said guidelines is as under:

"12. Creation of posts of Court Managers:

12.1 With a view to enhancing the efficiency of court management, and resultant improvement in case disposal, Rs.300 crore have been allocated for employment of professionally qualified Court Managers to assist judges. The Court Managers, with MBA degrees, will support the judges to perform their administrative duties, thereby enabling the judges to devote more time to their judicial functions. The post of a Court Manager would be created in each judicial district to assist the Principal District and Session judges. Two posts of Court Manager may be created for each High Court, and one for each Bench of the High Court. In case the High Court is of the opinion that one Court Manager would be sufficient for more than one district, then HLMC can also take such a decision."

8. It can thus be clear that the said guidelines reiterated

the allocation of the funds for the creation of the post of

6 Court Managers and recommended the number of posts to be

created at each level, be it at the High Court level or at the

District/ Sessions Court level.

9. The “Suggested Functions, Responsibilities and

Qualifications of the Court Managers” were provided in

Annexure III to the said guidelines, which are set out below:

“Policies and Standards

(1) Based on applicable directives of superior courts, establish the performance standards applicable to the court (including on timeliness, efficiency; quality of court performance; infrastructure; and human resources; access to justice; as well as for systems for court management and case management). (2) Carry out an evaluation of the compliance of the court with such standards; identify deficiencies and deviations; identify steps required to achieve compliance; maintain such an evaluation on a current basis through annual updates.

Planning (3) In consultation with the stakeholders of a court (including the Bar, ministerial staff, Executive Agencies supporting judicial functions such as prosecutors/police/process serving agencies and court users), prepare and update annually a 5-year court-wise Court Development Plan (CDP); (4) Monitor the implementation of the CDP and report to superior authorities on progress Information and Statistics

7 (5) Ensure that statistics on all aspects of the functioning of the Court are compiled and reported accurately and promptly in accordance with systems established by the High Court;

(6) Ensure that reports on statistics are duly completed and provided as required;

Court Management (7) Ensure that the processes and procedures of the court (including for filing, scheduling, conduct of adjudication, access to information and documents and grievance redressal) are fully compliant with the policies and standards established by the High Court for court management and that they safeguard quality, ensure efficiency and timeliness, and minimize costs to litigants and to the State; and enhance access to justice. (Note: standard systems for court management should be developed at the High Court level).

Case Management (8) Ensure that case management systems are fully compliant with the policies and standards established by the High Court for case management and that they address the legitimate needs of each individual litigant in terms of quality, efficiency and timeliness, costs to litigants and to the State (Note:

standard systems for case management should be developed at the High Court level).

Responsiveness Management: Access to Justice; Legal Aid and User Friendliness (9) Ensure that the court meets standards established by the High Court on access to justice, legal aid and user friendliness.

8 Quality Management (10) Ensure that the court meets quality of adjudication standards established by the High Court.

Human Resource Management (11) Ensure that Human Resource Management of ministerial staff in the court comply with the Human Resource Management standards established by the High Court.

Core Systems Management (12) Ensure that the core systems of the court are established and function effectively (documentation management; utilities management; infrastructure and facilities management; financial systems management (audits, accounts, payments);

IT Systems Management (13) Ensure that the IT systems of the court comply with standards established by the High Court and are fully functional.

(14) Feed the proposed National Arrears Grid to be set up to monitor the disposal of cases in all the courts, as and when it is set up.

Qualifications Court Managers may have the following minimum qualifications:

a. A degree or advanced diploma in general management;

b. 5 years’ experience/training in systems and process management;

9 c. 5 years’ experience/training in IT systems management, HR management, financial systems management;

d. Excellent people skills e. Excellent communication skills. f. Excellent computer application skills.”

10. It can be seen from the said guidelines that the main

function of the Court Managers was to increase efficiency

and quality in the working of the courts and judges by

assisting the administration in Case Management, Human

Resource Management, Core Systems Management, IT

Systems Management, etc. It was also recommended that the

Court Managers maintain information and statistics on all

aspects of functioning of the Court through collection of data

as well as prepare and update annually the 5-year Court

Development Plans. The said guidelines also recommended

that the minimum qualifications for appointment as a Court

Manager should be that the candidate must have a degree or

advanced diploma in management with an experience of five

or more years in Human Resources, Information Technology

or Financial Management and the candidate must have

10 strong people skills, communication skills and computer

application skills.

c. Letter by Finance Ministry dated 10th July 2013

11. Pursuant to the said guidelines, the Director, Finance

Commission Division, Department of Expenditure, Ministry

of Finance, vide another letter dated 10th July 2013, informed

to the Finance Secretaries of all States that an amount of Rs.

300 crore had been allocated for the employment of

professionally qualified Court Managers to assist the judges.

The States were allowed to use a part of their grant to provide

support to the Court Managers, provided that it does not

exceed Rs. 20,000/- per month per Court Manager.

12. Thereafter, in view of the aforesaid, many High Courts

and District Courts started appointing Court Managers, but

in the majority of the courts, the appointments were made

merely on a contractual basis since there were no formal

rules drafted for the employment of Court Managers. Thus,

these contractually appointed Court Managers had varied

pay scales and had no allowances or benefits arising out of

the employment.

11

d. Judgment of this Court in the present proceedings dated 2nd August 2018

13. This Court, in its judgment dated 2nd August 2018 given

in All India Judges’ Association and Others. v. Union of

India and Others2 in another application filed in this matter

itself, had discussed about the need of sound infrastructure

in the subordinate courts. While the issues raised in that

application were regarding general infrastructure, this Court,

gave directions regarding the necessary constituents of a

“Court Complex”. As a part of the discussion of the efficient

dispensation and the accessibility to justice for the litigants,

the role and importance of Court Managers was also

discussed. A direction was also given that Court Managers

who are already working must be regularized by the State

Government as their assistance was found necessary for a

proper administrative setup in the courts.

e. Report of the SNJPC dated 4th February, 2022

14. Thereafter, the SNJPC, under the Chairmanship of Mr.

Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi, former Judge of this Court,

was tasked with reviewing the pay scales, emoluments, and

service conditions of judicial officers in India’s district

2 (2018) 17 SCC 555 : 2018 INSC 671

12 judiciary. The post of Court Managers was also discussed as

there existed a number of vacanies and their services were

not being fully utilized. The relevant portion of the SNJPC

Report dated 4th February 2022 is as under:

“31. COURT MANAGERS 31.1 The appointment of Court Managers had started with 13th Finance Commission Scheme (Grant-in-aid scheme-2010). Now, in most of the States, Court Managers (who are MBAs – some of them are also Law graduates) are in place. They are required to have experience in IT Systems Management/Human Resources or Financial Management. There are Senior Court Managers, in addition to Court Managers in many States.

However, in most of the States, there are quite a number of vacancies remaining unfilled for years. According to the inputs received by the Commission, it appears that the services of Court Managers are not being fully utilized in some Courts in order to subserve the purpose for which they are appointed. The duties and responsibilities of Court Managers are laid down either in the Rules or the Circulars issued by the High Courts. Rules or Orders are in force in various States governing the qualifications, recruitment and conditions of service.

31.2 The need to avail the services of professionally qualified Court Managers was stressed by the apex Court in the case of AIJA (2018) 17 SCC 555 and a direction was given to regularize the services of Court Managers already working. In this context, para 12.9 of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is relevant.

“12.9. Professionally qualified Court Managers, preferably with an MBA degree, must also be appointed to render assistance in performing the court 13 administration. The said post of Court Managers must be created in each judicial district for assisting Principal District and Sessions Judges. Such Court Managers would enable the District Judges to devote more time to their core work, that is, judicial functions. This, in turn, would enhance the efficiency of the District Judicial System. These Court Managers would also help in identifying the weaknesses in the court management systems and recommending workable steps under the supervision of their respective Judges for rectifying the same. The services of any person already working as a Court Manager in any district should be regularized by the State Government as we are of the considered view that their assistance is needed for a proper administrative set-up in a court.” 31.3 Incidentally, we may mention that there is an informative and analytical paper prepared by DAKSH with the title “A study on the Role of Court Managers in Indian Judiciary” (2020). NALSAR University of Law at Hyderabad, in the report submitted to the Department of Justice on the subject – “A Study on Court Management Techniques For…Subordinate Courts” (2016), stressed the need for efficient Court Managers. 31.4 In most of the States, the regularization of services of Court Managers has not taken place in spite of long passage of time. The directive of the Supreme Court remains unimplemented though the High Courts have been addressing the State Governments in this regard. They continue to work either on a consolidated pay, the maximum of which is perhaps Rs.70,000/- (in the State of Telangana) or the inadequate pay provided for in the Rules. Either there are no allowances or the allowances fixed are quite low. For instance, in Maharashtra,

14 the Court Managers are appointed on contract basis for a period upto 5 years. The fixed pay of Senior Court Manager is Rs.51,500/- plus allowances (total Rs.64,000/-) and the Court Manager gets Rs.52,900/- (including allowances). There is a provision to increase fixed pay by 6% per annum if the service is satisfactory. In Maharashtra, the Court Managers of all ranks are almost in full strength. In Rajasthan, out of 35 Court Managers’ posts sanctioned for District Courts, 29 are presently working. Their pay is Rs.40,000/- p.m. with a provision for increase by 10% every year. The regularization process seems to be under consideration.

31.5 In Gujarat, the Court Managers who are appointed on contract basis get consolidated annual salary of Rs.7 lakhs in the 1 st year and from 2nd year, (s)he gets 10% incentive for ‘effective work’. In Tamil Nadu, as per the Rules of 2012 framed by Madras High Court under Article 229 of the Constitution, the temporary posts of Court Managers carry the pay scale of Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay (GP) of Rs.6600/-. The same pay pattern is in force for the Court Managers in the States of Punjab and Haryana. In the State of Chhattisgarh (where Rules have been amended to provide for regular cadre of Court Managers), the pay of Senior Court Manager and Court Manager respectively is Rs.15600-39100 plus Rs.5400/- Grade Pay (GP) and Rs.9300-34800 plus Rs.4800/- Grade Pay (GP). It is not clear whether they get any allowances.

31.6 The Rules of 2018 framed by the State of Assam are quite comprehensive and provide for better pay benefits. Scale of pay – Rs.30000-110000 with grade pay of Rs.14500/- and annual increment of 3%. More importantly, they are eligible to get all the allowances admissible to Government servants placed in the said pay scale. In the State of Assam, the Gauhati High Court (Appointment and

15 Conditions of Service of Court Managers for the State of Assam) Rules 2018 contemplate appointment of Court Managers on regular basis with the provisions for probation and confirmation. 31.7 In Kerala, the Court Managers appointed on contract basis are working in 8 District Courts, the sanctioned strength being 14. It appears, the process for regularization is under active consideration of Government. Presently, they get the pay of Rs.42500-87000 (pre-revised).

31.8 The Commission submits that in view of the ad hocism in conditions of service prevailing in various States, it would be appropriate if the Hon’ble Supreme Court issues a supplemental directive to the State Governments regarding creation of regular cadre of Court Managers and regularization of services of Court Managers appointed on contract or ad hoc basis. In any case, in whatever capacity they are appointed, there is every need to give them the benefit of higher pay with reasonable quantum of allowances. The Commission suggests accordingly.”

15. It is thus clear that in its comprehensive report, the

SNJPC addressed various aspects of judicial administration,

including the role of Court Managers. The SNJPC recognized

the importance of professional management in courts to

enhance efficiency and reduce the administrative burden on

the judges. It recommended the appointment of Court

Managers to handle non-judicial functions, allowing judges to

focus on their core judicial responsibilities. The SNJPC also

analysed the remuneration and the employment status of the

16 Court Managers in various States including Telangana,

Maharashtra and Rajasthan where the Court Managers

continued to work on either a consolidated pay or on a

contractual basis. The Report recognized the Gauhati High

Court (Appointment and Conditions of service of Court

Managers for the State of Assam) Rules, 2018 3 as being

comprehensive rules whereby the Court Managers were

regularized and were given pay benefits and an annual

increment.

16. The SNJPC Report concluded that in view of the ad-

hocism in the conditions of service of Court Managers, this

Court should issue supplemental directions to the State

Governments for creating regular cadre of Court Managers

and the regularization of their services. It was also concluded

that, in any case, the benefit of higher pay with allowances

must be given to the Court Managers.

f. Filing of the present IAs and the Writ Petition

17. It is therefore clear that after the recommendations of

the Thirteenth Finance Commission, the SNJPC Report and

judgment of this Court in the present proceedings dated 2nd

3 “Assam Rules of 2018” for short.

17 August 2018, it was expected that the High Courts across the

country would frame rules qua Court Managers and that the

State Governments would approve the same. However, upon a

perusal of the affidavits submitted by the various State

Governments and the High Courts in Ι.Α. Νos. 187237 of

2024 and 187240 of 2024, it can be seen that some of the

High Courts have finalised the rules for Court Managers

which have been approved by their respective State

Governments. Whereas, the rules prepared by some of the

High Courts are pending approval of the concerned State

Governments. It is further noticed that few of the High

Courts are yet to even frame the rules. As a result, the

present batch of IAs so also the Writ Petition came to be filed

before this Court.

18. The learned amicus curiae has submitted a tabular

chart depicting the position with regard to the status of rules

pertaining to the service conditions of the Court Managers in

each of the High Courts.

19. Upon perusal of the said chart, it can be seen that the

rules qua Court Managers in some of the States are yet to be

framed by the High Courts and yet to be approved by the

18 State Governments. Not only that, a perusal of the rules in

existence show that there is no uniform practice adopted by

the High Courts as well as State Governments in framing and

implementing the rules regarding Court Managers.

III. SUBMISSIONS

20. We have heard Shri Siddharth Bhatnagar who was

requested by this Court to assist as an amicus curiae. Shri

Bhatnagar has tirelessly consolidated the stands of various

High Courts and various State Governments and also given

his valuable suggestions with regard to the directions to be

issued by this Court. We have also heard various learned

Senior Counsel/learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

High Courts, State Governments and intervenors/petitioners.

21. Shri Bhatnagar submits that in view of the Report of the

Thirteenth Finance Commission, the SNJPC Report and the

clear directions of this Court vide the judgment in the

present proceedings dated 2nd August 2018, the Court

Managers appointed across India on a contractual or a

consolidated pay basis must be regularized and higher pay-

scales, along with appropriate allowances must be granted to

19 them. It is submitted that as per Articles 229 4 and 3095 of

Constitution of India, the High Courts and State

Governments have the power to determine the conditions of

service of its employees and hence, it may not be possible to

adopt a uniform pay scale and conditions of service. He,

however, submits that subject to minor variations, the rules

to be made applicable to the Court Managers in respect of all

States should largely be uniform so that there is not much

variance in the pay-scales and conditions of service of Court

Managers in some States as compared to the other States.

22. Shri Bhatnagar further submitted that the Assam Rules

of 2018, which have been drafted by the High Court of

Gauhati and approved by the State of Assam are the most

appropriate, and therefore, they should be considered as

model rules by the other High Courts and the State

Governments. He further submitted that the SNJPC itself

had observed that the Assam Rules of 2018 were

comprehensive and suggested that the other High Courts and

the State Governments, should frame the rules taking the

Assam Rules of 2018 as model rules subject to certain 4 Officers and servants and the expenses of High Courts. 5 Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Union or a State.

20 changes and modifications as needed by the concerned High

Courts and State Governments to meet its peculiar

requirements.

23. The learned amicus curiae submitted that in various

High Courts and District Courts, the Court Managers have

been functioning on contractual or consolidated pay basis for

a long period. He further submits that asking them to

undergo regular selection process at this stage would be

harsh on them. He, however, submits that in order to remove

the deadwood, it would be appropriate that a suitability test

of all such Court Managers who are working on contractual

or consolidated pay basis be conducted and only those who

are found suitable in the said test be continued. He submits

that only those Court Managers who do not pass the

suitability test, should be discontinued. He further submits

that taking into consideration that for a long period such

Court Managers have only been paid a consolidated amount

without any other service benefits, it would also be

appropriate that those Court Managers, who are found

suitable in the suitability test, be regularized by giving

retrospective effect to their services from the date of their 21 initial appointment. He also submits that while undertaking

the said exercise, the Rules Committee of the High Courts

should be guided by the directions given by this Court in the

judgment in the present proceedings dated 2nd August 2018.

24. The learned amicus curiae further submitted that the

Court Managers be provided uniform promotional avenues

and career progression and for that purpose, the

Chhattisgarh High Court Services (Appointment, Conditions of

Service and Conduct) Rules, 2017 6 may be considered as the

model rules.

25. It is lastly submitted by the learned amicus curiae that

preparation of the roster/chart regarding the responsibilities

and duties of the Court Managers be specifically left to the

Rules Committee of the respective High Courts and that the

Rules Committees of these High Courts should frame the

roster/chart while keeping in mind the specific requirements

of their respective High Court and the District/Sessions

Courts within its jurisdiction.

26. The various Senior Counsel/counsel appearing on

behalf of the various High Courts, State Governments and 6 “Chhattisgarh Rules of 2017” for short.

22 intervenors/petitioners also advanced submissions as per the

peculiar requirements prevailing in their High Courts and

District Courts.

IV. ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION

27. Having considered the submissions of the learned

amicus curiae as well as the submissions made by various

learned Senior Counsel and learned counsel appearing on

behalf of various High Courts, State Governments and

intervenors/petitioners, the issue we frame for our

consideration is as to “whether in light of the Thirteenth

Finance Commission, SNJPC Report and the judgment of

this Court in the present proceedings dated 2nd August 2018,

any further direction needs to be issued to various High

Courts and State Governments for framing and

implementation of rules for the Court Managers”.

V. ANALYSIS

28. It can be seen that, for the first time, the post of Court

Managers was proposed to be created by the Thirteenth

Finance Commission. The said Commission recognized the

importance of Court Managers for enhancing the efficiency of

court management. It has found that this would, in turn,

23 result in the improvement in the discharge of duties by the

Judicial Officers which resultantly provides access to speedy

justice. The said Commission, therefore, not only suggested

the roles and qualifications of Court Managers but also went

ahead to estimate and allocate funds required for the creation

of these posts and for appointment of Court Managers.

29. It will be relevant to note that after the Report of the

Thirteenth Finance Commission, certain guidelines came to

be issued by the Ministry of Finance which recommended the

roles, responsibilities and the qualifications of Court

Managers in great detail.

30. Though the said guidelines elaborately provided for

various aspects regarding the duties of the Court Managers,

most of the High Courts had not framed any such rules and

had appointed the Court Managers only on contractual basis

or ad hoc basis. This Court, therefore, was required to

reiterate the need of the Court Managers in its judgment

dated 2nd August 2018 in the present proceedings.

31. No doubt that this Court in the said judgment was

discussing the issue of infrastructure in subordinate courts,

however, while doing so, this Court also discussed about the

24 necessity of appointing Court Managers to be a part of the

“Court Complex”. It will be relevant to refer to the following

directions issued by this Court in the said case:

"12.9 Professionally qualified court managers, preferably with an MBA degree, must also be appointed to render assistance in performing the court administration. The said post of Court managers must be created in each judicial district for assisting Principal District and Sessions Judges. Such Court Managers would enable the District Judges to devote more time to their core work, that is, judicial functions. This, in turn, would enhance the efficiency of the District Judicial System. These court managers would also help in identifying the weaknesses in the court management systems and recommending workable steps under the supervision of their respective judges for rectifying the same. The services of any person already working as a Court Manager in any district should be regularised by the State Government as we are of the considered view that their assistance is needed for a proper administrative set up in a Court."

(Emphasis Supplied)

32. A perusal of the aforesaid direction given by this Court

would reveal that this Court found that, the provisionally

qualified Court Managers were necessary to render

assistance to the courts in performing the court

administration. This Court found that the appointment of

Court Managers in the district judicial system would enable

the District Judges to devote more time to their core work,

25 that is, judicial functions. This Court further found that the

Court Managers would also help in identifying the

weaknesses in the court management systems and for

rectifying the same, recommend appropriate steps under the

supervision of their respective judges. This Court directed

that the services of any person already working as a Court

Manager in any district should be regularised by the State

Government. This Court emphasized that this was necessary

inasmuch as their assistance was needed for a proper

administrative set up in a court.

33. It will also be relevant to refer to the following

observations of this Court in the aforesaid case:

“6. It has to be firmly borne in mind and accepted as a reality that raising the infrastructure standards in the court complexes is the need of the hour as it is the basic requirement for the courts in the twenty-first century. We are absolutely clear that when people are aware of their rights, their desire to get the rights realised is enhanced and they would like to knock at the doors of the Court to shape their aspiration into reality. It is a welcome phenomenon and conceptually, Rule of Law nourishes and garners the said idea. The idea of speedy and quality justice dispensation system cannot be treated with status quoist approach, for the definition of infrastructure and the understanding of the same in all associated contexts changes with the passage of time and introduction of modern technology in many a sphere of life. The consumers of justice

26 expect prompt and effective delivery of justice in an atmosphere that is acceptable. Therefore, infrastructure enhancement will go a long way in strengthening functioning of the court and would improve the productivity in the justice delivery system.

7. Be it noted, a court complex is not just a building.

It is the building of justice which breathes and infuses life into the exalted and sublime ideals of justice. The widening gap between the ideal and the real and between the vision and the pragmatic realisation of justice has to be bridged by proper access to justice for all.

8. It brings us to the focal point i.e. judicial infrastructure which has been given relatively low importance, if not long neglected. That needs an overhaul. Apart from the metropolitan cities and State capitals, infrastructure in courts, especially in the interior parts of the country, is dying out. It would not be wrong to say that some of them are just on the ventilator. A decrepit or crumbling court infrastructure inevitably results in causing impediment in access to justice. Undeniably, access to justice and rule of law is intrinsically linked. No democracy can afford to undermine the core values of rule of law. Thus, strengthening of court infrastructure requires immediate attention in the form of planning, enhanced budgeting and structured implementation or execution of the plans. Presently, most of the States are making budgetary provision as low as less than 1% of their total budget for the judiciary.”

34. It can be seen that this Court recognised the need for

raising the standard of infrastructure in the court complexes.

It observed that it was the need of the hour as it was the

27 basic requirement for the courts in the twenty-first century.

It was observed that the idea of speedy and quality justice

dispensation system could not be treated with a status quoist

approach.

35. We are at pains to say that even though the SNJPC in

its Report had recommended and this Court in the judgment

dated 2nd August 2018 in the present proceedings had

specifically directed the rules to be framed for determining

the service conditions, the duties etc., of Court Managers,

various High Courts and various State Governments have not

yet complied with the said direction.

36. In spite of specific observations issued by this Court

that the persons already working as Court Managers should

be regularised, till date in many Courts, the Court Managers

are still working on either contractual basis or on ad hoc

basis. Leave aside the issue with regard to regularization,

allowances, other benefits and promotional avenues being

addressed to, it has also been brought to our notice that in

some of the States, a decision had been taken to discontinue

the services of Court Managers and some of the State

28 Governments have decided to discontinue the post of Court

Managers citing the ground of shortage of funds.

37. We are of the considered view that since this Court has

been consistently observing that the service conditions of all

the Judges in the entire country should be uniform, it is also

necessary that the system as approved by this Court for

providing the services of the Court Managers to the courts to

enhance the efficiency of administration of justice also needs

to be largely uniform throughout the country.

38. At the cost of repetition, we observe that this Court has

already emphasized the need of the Court Managers to assist

the District Judges in administrative works so that the

Judges can devote their time to their core functions, that is,

adjudication of cases. In that view of the matter, it becomes

imperative that this Court reiterates its earlier directions so

that the rules with regard to service conditions of the Court

Managers are framed and approved in a time-bound manner.

39. We have perused the Assam Rules of 2018. The said

Rules provide for regularization of the services of the Court

Managers and provide for the other benefits and allowances.

29 The said Rules also specify the method of recruitment and

training required to be undergone by the Court Managers.

Most importantly, the said Rules also enlist the various

duties and responsibilities of the Court Managers in Rule 14,

which is set out below:

“14.

(i) The Court Manager, in case of High Court, shall assist the Registrar General and other Registrars in the Principal Seat of the High Court, and Court Manager, in case of Judicial District, shall assist the District Judge of the respective Judicial Districts, in administrative functioning of the Courts, to enhance efficiency of Court Management.

(ii) The Court Manager in the High Court and Judicial District shall work under the control of the Registrar General or the District Judge, respectively.

(iii) The Court Manager shall maintain professional secrecy and shall not divulge any information which may come to his or her knowledge to anyone under any circumstances. Breach of this condition shall amount to misconduct.

(iv) The Court Manager shall perform the duties enumerated in Schedule- I.

(v) In addition to the duties enumerated in Schedule I, the Court Manager shall discharge and perform such other duties as may be assigned to him or her by the Registrar General or the District Judge.”

40. Thus, it can be seen that the Assam Rules of 2018

clearly outline the role of the Court Managers in assisting the

Registrar General and the District Judges. The said Rules 30 also set out that the Court Managers are to work as per the

assignments given by the Registrar General or the District

Judge. Further, Schedule-I of the Assam Rules of 2018 goes

into much more detail about the duties and the work of the

Court Managers. Broadly, the duties are in consonance with

the recommendations as given by the Thirteenth Finance

Commission. Some other duties have also been prescribed to

Court Managers as per the needs of the High Court or the

District Courts. We, therefore, agree with the SNJPC Report

whereby the Assam Rules of 2018 were recognized as being

comprehensive in their scope.

41. We find, that as in other services, the promotional

avenues are necessary for the employees who would be

joining the base post of “Court Manager”. The stagnation at

one particular level would reduce the efficiency in the

functioning of such Court Managers. If promotional avenues

are available, it will lead to better performance and efficiency

of the Court Managers. In the alternative, the High Courts

and the State Governments should also consider providing a

scheme in the rules for Assured Career Progression (ACP) to

incentivise the functioning of the Court Managers. We 31 therefore agree with the submissions of the learned amicus

curiae that the High Courts and the State Governments

should also consider providing for promotional avenues or in

the alternative, an ACP Scheme contingent upon the

exigencies that exist in the particular High Court and the

State.

42. We find that the Assam Rules of 2018 should be

considered as the model rules when the other High Courts

frame their rules. Needless to state that the High Courts and

the State Governments can always make certain changes and

modifications in order to take care of certain exigencies which

may be peculiar to their particular High Court and the

particular State.

43. We further find that the directions issued by this Court

in the judgment dated 2nd August 2018 in the present

proceedings with regard to the regularization of the services

of the Court Managers who were already in employment

needs to be reiterated. The Court Managers having served for

years, after rendering their services for such a long period; if

they are not made permanent and are to be thrown away at

32 this stage, it would cause a great hardship to them. We are

also in agreement with the submission of the learned amicus

curiae that for separating the deadwood, a suitability test can

be conducted so that the Court Managers who are

functioning properly are continued and only such Court

Managers who are not found suitable should be

discontinued. The rules in this regard can be formulated

accordingly.

VI. CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS

44. In the result, the present batch of IAs and Writ Petition

are disposed of in the following terms:

(i) We direct that all the High Courts in the

country shall frame or amend the rules

providing for recruitment and conditions of

service of Court Managers, by taking the Assam

Rules of 2018 as the model Rules, and submit it

to the State Government for approval within a

period of 3 months from the date of this

judgment. Needless to state that the High

Courts and the State Governments would be at

33 liberty to make suitable modifications/changes

so as to suit their peculiar needs;

(ii) We further direct that upon receipt of the rules

framed or amendments thereof by the High

Courts, the respective State Governments shall

finalise and grant approval to the same within a

further period of 3 months;

(iii) We clarify that the minimum rank/class of such

Court Managers should be of a Class-II Gazetted

Officer for the purpose of basic pay, allowances

and other service benefits;

(iv) We further clarify that the Court Managers

appointed in the High Courts shall work under

the directions and supervision of the Registrar

General/Registrars of the High Courts. Insofar

as the Court Managers appointed in the District

Courts are concerned, they shall work under the

supervision and control of the

Registrars/Superintendents (Head of the

Ministerial Staff) of the concerned courts;

34 (v) While determining the duties, functions and the

responsibilities of the Court Managers, the

Rules Committee of the High Courts shall

ensure that their duties, functions and

responsibilities do not overlap with that of the

Registrars of the High Court/District Courts;

(vi) Insofar as the Court Managers, who are already

working either on contractual or consolidated

pay basis or on ad hoc basis are concerned,

their services shall be continued and

regularized subject to their passing the

suitability test as will be provided in the rules to

be framed by the respective High Courts and

approved by the respective State Governments;

(vii) We clarify that such of the Court Managers who

are already working would be entitled to

regularization from the date of their initial

appointment. We further clarify that the

benefits of such a regularization though would

entitle them for continuity in service for all the

35 purposes including terminal benefits, they

would not be entitled for the arrears, if any, on

account of difference between salary for the

period from the date on which they are working

till the date of their actual regularization;

(viii) We direct that the process of regularization of

the Court Managers shall commence and be

completed within a period of 3 months from the

date of approval of the rules by the respective

State Governments;

(ix) We clarify that the respective Registrar Generals

of the High Courts and the Chief Secretaries of

the State Governments shall be personally

responsible for adhering to the aforesaid

timelines; and

(x) I.A. No. 135045 of 2023 is disposed of with a

request to the concerned Division Bench of the

Punjab and Haryana High Court to decide the

matter captioned as LPA 1951/2019 pending

before it in terms of this judgment.

36 45. We place on record our deep gratitude for the assistance

rendered by Shri Siddharth Bhatnagar, learned amicus curiae

ably assisted by Mr. Ankit Yadav and Mr. Aditya Sidhra,

learned counsel. We also place on record our appreciation for

the Senior Counsel and counsel appearing on behalf of the

various High Courts, State Governments and

intervenors/petitioners.

..............................CJI (B.R. GAVAI)

............................................J (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)

…..............................J (K. VINOD CHANDRAN) NEW DELHI;

MAY 16, 2025.

37