Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant recently addressed the widespread misunderstandings surrounding the role of the Chief Justice as the ‘Master of the Roster’. Speaking at an event hosted by the Oxford Union, Justice Kant emphasized that this role is just one of many administrative functions of the Chief Justice and is often misinterpreted.
Clarification on Roster Allocation
During a question and answer session moderated by Amaan Asim, Director of Research at the Oxford Union, Justice Kant responded to queries about the allocation of rosters and concerns over bench compositions potentially influencing politically sensitive cases. He highlighted that the allocation process is guided by transparency and predetermined systems rather than personal discretion.
“Rosters are published in advance and are available in the public domain, allowing litigants and lawyers to know which categories of cases will be heard by specific benches,” Justice Kant explained. “Most matters are listed through automated systems, ensuring that the roster is always prepared ahead of time.”
Beyond the Roster: Broader Responsibilities
Justice Kant stressed that public discussions often focus narrowly on case allocation, overshadowing the broader constitutional and administrative duties of the Chief Justice of India. He stated, “The concept of the expression ‘Master of the Roster’ is unfortunately misunderstood in the general context.”
He elaborated on his other responsibilities, which include judicial appointments, managing court infrastructure, and addressing institutional concerns. “Preparation of the roster for case allocation is just one of many responsibilities. It doesn’t make the Chief Justice of India a very powerful authority,” he remarked, underscoring that the publication of rosters aims to enhance transparency rather than centralize power.
More Read
Optimizing Judicial Expertise
The Chief Justice also explained that while assigning work, the court considers the professional experience and expertise of judges to make optimal use of their skills. For instance, judges with a background in criminal law may be assigned criminal cases, while those experienced in corporate litigation may handle commercial disputes. “I would like to have an optimum utilization of the experience and the ability with which a judge has been elevated to the Supreme Court,” Justice Kant stated.
Contextualizing the Roster System
Justice Kant concluded by emphasizing that the roster system should be viewed within the broader framework of institutional administration and judicial efficiency, rather than just through the lens of individual case allocations. The session, co-hosted by the Oxford Law Society and the Oxford Union, included opening remarks by Tanvi Dubey, Advocate on Record at Oxford University. Justice Kant’s address focused on “Constitutional Promise to Digital Reality: Safeguarding Justice in the Age of AI and Technological Advancement.”
