Not a 10-5 job: Supreme Court judges, lawyers discuss criticism about court vacations

The Supreme Court on Wednesday witnessed an exchange between judges and senior lawyers on criticism surrounding court vacations.

The discussion took place while a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma was examining when the a case concerning election commission appointments should be heard next, after the Court's upcoming vacations.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta noted that the duration of vacations had already been reduced.

Justice Sharma added that judges continued to work even during the partial working days.

“Our vacation is further curtailed by two weeks. I can go out only after 15th. And final hearing cases are being listed,” he observed.

Mehta then strongly defended the need for court vacations and the workload handled by judges.

“I am bold enough to say this… We must send a message to everyone who is criticising that Supreme Court is taking vacations. We are not having 10-5 jobs. The Hon’ble judges read 60 files… our office starts after 5 pm. Why can’t we accept that fact? And really have the vacation,” he said.

Justice Datta responded by saying that judges need adequate time because of the nature of the Supreme Court’s work as the final constitutional court.

“Is it really for us to justify why vacations should be there? It’s for the people to understand. Because after all, we are the final court of the land. If we commit an error, even a meritorious case will go the other way! It’s all the more necessary. I know I have to prepare 15 judgments during the partial working days,” Justice Datta said.

Attorney General R Venkataramani also joined the discussion.

“Many of us know, but when we talk too much, it becomes an issue, when we don’t talk it becomes an issue,” he remarked.

Continuing the exchange, Mehta argued that a periodic rest was scientifically necessary for effective functioning.

“In some countries, out of two holidays every week, one holiday is a compulsory holiday because they believe that unless a person takes rest once in a week, he cannot effectively discharge his functions. To ensure that one day is a complete rest day there is a vehicular curfew… it’s scientific,” he said.

Justice Datta, however, noted that there were differing views on the issue.

“There are other experts who have their opinion,” he said.

The Solicitor General then referred to social media criticism directed at judges and courts.

“Now social media has created several experts.. standing at the tea stall they would say why Sachin (Tendulkar) committed a serious error,” Mehta said.

He added,

“I always say you need three things for being active on social media: a smartphone, lots of time at your disposal, and free data. If you have these three you are an expert on everything.”

The Court was hearing petitions challenging the 2023 law governing appointments to the Election Commission of India. The Bench initially suggested that the matter could be heard in August, after the Court reopens post its upcoming vacations.

At this point, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners in the case, requested that it be listed immediately after reopening.

"Can it be in the second week of July?" Bhushan asked.

Justice Datta, however, said the Court would need some time to get back into regular rhythm after the partial working days period.

“First two weeks, it requires some time for the engine to warm up, after six weeks of holidays,” Justice Datta remarked in jest, ultimately posting the matter for July 30.

[Read Live Coverage]