Create a Professional Court Management System

Judges are trained to hear cases, interpret the law, and deliver judgments. They should not have to spend much of their time managing a court’s day-to-day operations.

Courts are also large organizations. Someone must manage case flow, schedules, staff, records, technology, facilities, budgets, and performance information. When these responsibilities fall heavily on judges and court staff without professional management expertise, valuable judicial time can be lost and administrative problems can slow cases down.

India has experimented with professional Court Managers before. The government allocated ₹300 crore, following the 13th Finance Commission’s recommendation, to create professionally qualified Court Manager positions, specifically to reduce judges’ administrative workload and give them more time for judicial work.

The idea should now become a permanent and professional part of India’s court system.

Judges should manage justice. Professional managers should manage court operations.

India should create a professional Court Management Service with trained court managers working across district courts, High Courts, and other major court complexes.

Court managers should be responsible for the administrative side of running courts, including case workflow, scheduling support, staff management, records, technology, facilities, budgets, and performance information. They should also identify administrative bottlenecks and help ensure that cases do not become delayed simply because of poor coordination or workflow.

Court managers should be professionally recruited and trained in court administration, operations, technology, data analysis, budgeting, and case-flow management.

Judges would remain fully responsible for judicial decisions and control over individual cases. Professional managers would support them by making sure the organization around them operates efficiently.

Each major court should also use simple performance dashboards showing pending cases, case age, workload, hearing schedules, and other operational information so that problems can be identified early.

The transition to digital courts should also include practical training and support for lawyers, particularly in rural and underserved areas. Training should cover electronic filing, digital legal research, virtual hearings, and other digital court procedures so that lack of familiarity with technology does not become a barrier to accessing or participating in the justice system.

The United States provides a useful example. Professional court administrators and executives perform many of the management functions that do not require a judge. The U.S.-based National Center for State Courts even operates professional certification programs for court managers covering budgeting, workforce management, case flow, workflow, and court performance.

The results can be significant. North Dakota introduced professional case-flow management supported by real-time dashboards showing judges’ caseloads and pending decisions. According to the National Center for State Courts, some district courts cut overdue cases in half, while all participating courts significantly reduced them.

India does not need to copy the American system. But it can apply the same management principle: let judges focus on judging while trained professionals ensure the courts run efficiently.

Every hour a judge spends unnecessarily managing administration is an hour they cannot spend delivering justice.