'Some Take Too Many Breaks': Supreme Court Orders Performance Review Of Judges
Last Updated:
The Supreme Court voiced its concern while hearing a plea from four life convicts belonging to Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Classes communities.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday voiced the need for a comprehensive performance audit to assess the functioning of judges, citing a growing number of complaints regarding the efficiency of High Court judges.
A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh orally noted that while many judges demonstrate diligent work ethics, concerns have arisen about others who frequently take unnecessary breaks, prompting questions about their effective utilization of court time.
'There are some judges who work very hard, but at the same time, there are judges who are unnecessarily taking coffee breaks; this break or that break. What is for lunch hour, etc. We are hearing a lot of complaints about the High Court judges. This is a larger issue which needs to be looked into. What is the performance of the High Court judges? How much we are spending and what is the output? It's high time we do a performance audit," the Court said as per Bar and Bench.
The Supreme Court voiced its concern while hearing a plea from four life convicts belonging to Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Classes communities. These individuals alleged that the Jharkhand High Court had failed to pronounce judgments on their criminal appeals for an extended period of two to three years after reserving them.
The Court had previously sought information regarding the status of these long-pending cases. On May 5, the Supreme Court directed all High Courts to submit reports detailing cases where judgments remained pending despite the matters being reserved. Continuing its scrutiny, the Supreme Court reiterated the paramount importance of this issue, suggesting the potential issuance of guidelines to ensure the timely delivery of judgments. The Court emphasized that the matter directly impacts the fundamental principles of the criminal justice system.
On May 9, Supreme Court took further steps which included a request for reports from High Courts specifying the dates of judgment pronouncement and their subsequent publication on court websites.
'It seems that the issues noticed in the above mentioned orders would require and deeper analysis and mandatory guidelines by this Court, so that convicts or undertrials aren't compelled to lose faith in the justice delivery system and to avoid the petitions like one in present case," it noted.
First Published:
May 14, 2025, 11:59 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump administration asks Supreme Court to pause mass layoffs at Education Department
President Donald Trump's administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to pause a court order to reinstate Education Department employees who were fired in mass layoffs as part of his plan to dismantle the agency. The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court said U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the layoffs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Joun's order has blocked one of the Republican president's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the layoffs 'will likely cripple the department.' But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The layoffs help put in the place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states,' Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that layoffs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.' Trump later said the department's functions will be parceled to other agencies, suggesting that federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programs involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states.' Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a $4.5 billion cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
Karnataka HC grants interim relief to KSCA officials in Bengaluru stampede case
Bengaluru (Karnataka) [India], June 6 (ANI): The Karnataka High Court on Friday granted interim relief to the office bearers of the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA), who had approached the court seeking the quashing of the FIR registered against them in connection with the stampede outside the Chinnaswamy Stadium here, which claimed the lives of 11 people. In an interim order, the court directed the state police to not take any coercive action against them until further orders. The High Court adjourned the case to June 9. KSCA President Raghu Ram Bhat, Secretary A Shankar, Treasurer ES Jairam petition, and other KSCA office bearers moved the High Court seeking to quash the FIR. Marketing and Revenue Head of the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB), Nikhil Sosale also approached the High Court challenging his arrest in connection with the stampede. Sosale was arrested by the Bengaluru Police in the early hours of June 6 (Friday). He has contended that the arrest was illegal, arbitrary and not in accordance with the law. He claimed that he was arrested without any materials and even before the police had conducted a preliminary enquiry. He has thus sought to declare his arrest as illegal. On Thursday, the Bengaluru police registered an FIR against the RCB franchise; DNA Entertainment Pvt. Ltd., an event management company; and the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA) for culpable homicide, illegal assembly, and other serious charges. A day after the stampede that claimed the lives 11 people, the Karnataka police suspended multiple IPS officers, including the Bengaluru city police Commissioner, B Dayananda. Apart from Dayananda, Additional Commissioner of Police Vikash Kumar Vikash, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Central) Shekhar HT, Assistant Commissioner of Police Balakrishna and Cubbon Park Police Inspector Girish AK were also suspended with immediate effect. Meanwhile, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Friday criticised the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for politicising the recent stampede. His remarks came after the BJP accused the Congress-led state government of making the police a 'scapegoat' in the incident. CM Siddaramaiah said the state government has already taken action against officials who were found to be 'visibly responsible' and 'negligent in their duty.' 'They are doing it for politics. I don't do politics. We have taken action against those who were visibly responsible and found to be negligent in their duty,' the Chief Minister said here. Meanwhile, Karnataka BJP President BY Vijayendra accused the state government of only acting when pressure was put on them. 'The state government has acted only after coming under pressure. Action has been taken against RCB and the Karnataka Cricket Association. Yesterday, the Chief Minister suddenly suspended senior police officers, including the Bengaluru City Police Commissioner, and five other officials,' Vijayendra said. (ANI)
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Trump asks supreme court to halt court order over education department
The Trump administration on Friday urged the Supreme Court to block a lower court ruling that reinstated nearly 1,400 Education Department employees who were dismissed under President Donald Trump's controversial plan to dismantle the agency. In an emergency appeal, the Justice Department said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston overstepped his authority when he issued a preliminary injunction last month at the request of several Democratic-led states, school districts, and teachers' unions. The Boston-based First US Circuit Court of Appeals had already rejected the administration's request to pause the injunction while the appeals process played out. The lower court order required the government not only to reverse the mass layoffs but also to halt broader efforts to dissolve the department — one of Trump's headline campaign promises. In March, Trump signed an executive order to eliminate the Department of Education, triggering immediate backlash from opponents who called it a direct attack on public education. Critics have noted that while the Education Department does not directly operate schools, it plays a critical role in dispersing federal funds, enforcing civil rights laws such as Title IX, and supporting low-income students, students with disabilities, and higher education institutions.
