Supreme Court Vacations: Essential Rest or Excessive Time Off?

Supreme Court Vacation Schedule Sparks Debate on Judicial Productivity

The Supreme Court's summer vacation has sparked considerable debate. Scheduled from May 20th to July 8th, this extended break has divided opinions. On one hand, some argue that the focus should not be on the number of working hours or days but rather on the efficiency and productivity of the court. Conversely, others believe that the number of vacations is excessive and requires regulation. 

Economist Sanjeev Sanyal's recent statement that judges work for only a few hours before heading off for summer vacation has ignited a storm. His argument has found support among those who believe the judiciary's work ethic is lacking. However, many others contend that this perspective stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of how courts operate. 

Dr. Swati Jindal Garg, Advocate on Record, practising in the Supreme Court points out that the perception that the SC takes too many leaves is a result of not fully grasping the complexities and demands of judicial work. Dr. Garg elaborates further, pointing out that, technically, the apex court in India operates for an average of 190 days a year. When compared to other countries, this figure is quite different. “For instance, the SC in the U.S works only 68 days on an average a year, Australia’s is about 97 days, and South Africa’s is about 128 days. In contrast, our country’s apex court works for a significantly higher number of days," she notes.

Supreme Court Vacation Schedule Sparks Debate on Judicial Productivity

The Supreme Court's summer vacation has sparked considerable debate. Scheduled from May 20th to July 8th, this extended break has divided opinions. On one hand, some argue that the focus should not be on the number of working hours or days but rather on the efficiency and productivity of the court. Conversely, others believe that the number of vacations is excessive and requires regulation. 

Economist Sanjeev Sanyal's recent statement that judges work for only a few hours before heading off for summer vacation has ignited a storm. His argument has found support among those who believe the judiciary's work ethic is lacking. However, many others contend that this perspective stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of how courts operate. 

Dr. Swati Jindal Garg, Advocate on Record, practising in the Supreme Court points out that the perception that the SC takes too many leaves is a result of not fully grasping the complexities and demands of judicial work. Dr. Garg elaborates further, pointing out that, technically, the apex court in India operates for an average of 190 days a year. When compared to other countries, this figure is quite different. “For instance, the SC in the U.S works only 68 days on an average a year, Australia’s is about 97 days, and South Africa’s is about 128 days. In contrast, our country’s apex court works for a significantly higher number of days," she notes.

Dr. Garg highlights the immense workload handled by Indian judges. "Judges in India are handling more than 100 cases every day. Is it possible for a rational human being to do more than this? I feel we must cut some slack to the judiciary on this. When we discuss working days, the calculation often overlooks the vacation benches. This time, we had more vacation benches," she adds. 

Sudhanshu S Pandey, an advocate with the Supreme Court offers a comprehensive view on the complexities of a Supreme Court judge's working life, emphasising that it's far from the typical nine-to-five government job. He stresses the need for a nuanced understanding of the judiciary's workload and the factors influencing their working days.

"A SC judge’s life is not like that of a government employee who works from nine to five. We must look at the demanding routine of a judge, who often receives case files in the evening to prepare for hearings the next day. This preparation involves reading, researching, and understanding the intricacies of the case to deliver a well-informed judgement. Even when the orders have to be passed, the judge has to read a lot of materials, research the subject, and process it completely to make a correct judgement," he adds.

Pandey points out that the delay in the delivery of justice is a multifaceted issue, and judges are not the only ones to be held accountable. He asserts that advocates also share the responsibility for the delays.

"We lawyers are also responsible for this," Pandey states candidly. "Most of the time, we are not available. We have more cases, and we go to more courts. Because of all this, we can’t attend to all matters, and we have to request adjournments. Even during Covid, we lost a lot of working days, and we had to increase the number of working days, but in turn, it has reduced and this reduction has led to an increase in case pendency," he notes. 

Over the past year, the apex court has operated for only 195 days, making it the court with the fewest working days among all constitutional courts. This has intensified the ongoing demand for Indian courts to either shorten or eliminate their vacation periods, especially in light of the significant backlog of cases and the shortage of judges.

Mahalakshmi Pavani, a senior advocate of the Supreme Court, offers a contrasting perspective on the issue of the court's working days and vacations. She emphasises the intense nature of judicial work, saying, "It is a mentally demanding job. It is a stressful role. Judges also need time to write their judgments." Pavani points out that judges handle an overwhelming number of cases daily, leaving little room for a social life. 

Highlighting the global significance of the SC, Pavani adds, "SC judges represent the largest democracy in the world. They are invited globally, and their judgments are noted worldwide." While acknowledging the need for more working days, she warns against the potential consequences of overworking judges. "I understand we must have more working days, and we are ready to work. But think if judges are made to work continuously... think about the impact on the quality of judgments," she cautions.

In response to these concerns, a petition was filed in the Bombay High Court earlier, urging a reevaluation of the courts' vacation schedule. The petition argued that the extended breaks were infringing upon the fundamental rights of litigants, who are left waiting longer for justice. 

Dr. Kislay Pandey, a leading corporate and criminal lawyer at the Supreme Court, offers a practical solution to address the issue of judicial workload and delays. "My suggestion is that retired judges of the SC should be considered on an ad hoc basis," Dr. Pandey proposes. "There should be an ad hoc court held, perhaps in some good five-star hotels or similar venues, where less important cases can be taken up."

While there are contrasting views on the subject, many believe that both lawyers and judges often favour fewer working days as it simplifies their lives. This perception fuels frustration among the public, especially for those with cases pending in the courts. Citizens are increasingly exasperated with the limited number of working days, feeling that it increases their waiting period to get justice. The demand for more judicial working days reflects the growing impatience and dissatisfaction among litigants seeking timely resolutions to their cases.

Mathews J Nedumpara, a senior advocate in the SC, highlights several pressing issues facing the judiciary. He explains, "There are numerous cases where cases are never taken up. There are cases where your name is in the list but it is never taken. Some cases are heard, others are never heard at all. The problem is very complex."

Nedumpara suggests that one solution could involve ensuring that the court never completely shuts down. "We need to find a mechanism where the entire court is not closed down. If judges or lawyers need to take a short leave, that should be possible, but at least 50 percent of the court should be functioning at all times," he proposes. He acknowledges the need for judges to rest but criticises the length of certain breaks. "This Diwali vacation is so unjustified. We can have a one-week vacation, but what is the justification for closing the court for 18 days at one stretch?" he questions.

Nedumpara also points to a disparity in how cases are handled based on the socio-economic status of litigants. "The reality is that the cases of less privileged people are not being heard. The litigants who can afford privileged lawyers have their cases heard for hours. Who do they represent? They represent the elite class, not the common man," he asserts. He raises a critical issue about the dual nature of the Supreme Court, questioning if it can serve both the rich and the poor effectively. "There are multiple issues with the court that no one talks about. But these are important issues that need to be discussed," Nedumpara asserts.

Dive deeper with The Probe. For thoughtful analysis and in-depth stories directly to your phone, join our WhatsApp channel. Click and Connect with us Today: [WhatsApp Channel Link] 🔗

At The Probe, our commitment to social impact journalism is at the core of everything we do. Funded by well-meaning individuals from the public, our aim is to drive positive social change and make a real-world impact through the stories we report.

If you wish to support us, please visit our Truth Brigade page and contribute to a cause that resonates with you the most. It is through your support that we have been able to keep the flame of our journalism alive in these difficult times. Click link to support us to make a difference: https://theprobe.in/truth-brigade