The esteemed Mr. Kapil Sibal’s recent article in The Hindu, dated June 4, scrutinizes the tradition of judicial vacations with incisive clarity. Indeed, while judges are certainly entitled to the breaks afforded to them by the system, public concern arises not from these individual vacations but rather from the judiciary as a whole experiencing partial or complete shutdowns. This distinction is crucial.
Historically, these court vacations, particularly during the summer months, trace their origins to the colonial era. They were initially implemented to allow British judges and barristers to avoid the oppressive heat, working instead during more temperate periods. Although the nomenclature has changed, the structure mimics the British system, which divides the court calendar into four terms: Michaelmas, Hilary, Easter, and Trinity. When the Madras High Court was inaugurated in 1862, it adhered to this pattern, sitting for just 12 weeks annually across four sessions.
Post-independence, while the British departed in 1947, the summer heat persisted, justifying the continuation of these breaks. Air-conditioned courtrooms were a late arrival, and by then, the tradition of summer vacations had become deeply entrenched. As judicial backlogs grew, public frustration mounted, prompting systemic introspection. The 230th Law Commission report in 2009 recommended extending the number of working days for judges to alleviate the backlog, suggesting a significant reduction in vacation periods.
In 2014, then-Chief Justice of India, Justice RM Lodha, proposed a more balanced approach. He reached out to High Court Chief Justices, seeking their input on a plan to keep courts operational year-round. Justice Lodha wisely avoided encroaching on judges’ vacation time, instead suggesting that judges preemptively indicate their desired leave periods each year. This arrangement would allow judges their full vacation entitlement without necessitating court closures.
The 133rd report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice, published in 2023, also advocated for judges to take individual leave rather than having the entire judiciary shut down during specified periods. Despite these recommendations, the current practice remains unchanged. The Supreme Court operates for 193 days annually, while High Courts and civil courts function for 210 days, and criminal trial courts for 245 days.
More Read
It is imperative to acknowledge the demanding nature of judicial duties and the need for improved working conditions. Several measures could enhance judges’ professional lives:
- Judges should receive paid sabbaticals to study international advancements in justice.
- The judiciary’s demanding schedule often strains family ties. Therefore, government-funded family holidays should be considered.
- An independent “Judicial Pay and Service Commission” should be established, amending the “Salary, Allowances and Pension of Judges Act, 1958” for automatic, indexed revisions.
- Standardized national provisions for housing, medical care, security, and education for judges’ dependents should be classified as “conditions of service.”
- Judicial workloads should be managed by revising staff numbers and integrating advanced technology for efficiency.
- Continued judicial education should be statutory, with resources guaranteed for higher courts.
- A confidential, peer-reviewed evaluation system for Supreme Court elevations should balance integrity assessments with judicial independence.
- The “in-house procedure” for complaints against judges should be codified, supporting the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, and following the Supreme Court’s guidance in C Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice AM Bhattacharjee (1995).
- Judiciary infrastructure, including residences and libraries, should be explicitly defined as “conditions of service.”
- Harmonizing service conditions across High Courts could enhance judicial careers, mitigating non-merit-based transfer and elevation factors.
Implementing these measures would address judges’ challenges more effectively than maintaining outdated practices such as court vacations.
NL Rajah, a Senior Advocate, contributes his expertise from the Madras High Court.
