Lawyers, litigants may decide appraisal of judges

No performance evaluation system for higher judiciary; Annual Confidential Reports evaluate performance of lower court judges

Published: 01st July 2018 05:39 AM  |   Last Updated: 01st July 2018 09:42 AM   |  A+A-

justice, judiciary, illustration, TNIE, ACR

NEW DELHI: The Ministry of Law and Justice is planning to put in place a more scientific method to evaluate the performance of the lower judiciary across the country and has asked research institutions to work out a uniform system.

At present, India does not have a performance evaluation system for the higher judiciary. For the lower judiciary, there is a system of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs). These reports are prepared by High Courts but the information is not made public.

An official linked with the project said, “Feedback from lawyers and litigants appearing before a particular judge will play a key role in finalising the ACR. Apart from this, attendance, timesheets and orders and their outcome will also be looked at.”

Evaluation through ACRs is a three-step process: the judicial officer first makes a self-assessment, which is then evaluated by a reporting authority, who is a senior judge in the lower court. An accepting authority, who is a judge of the High Court, then makes the final assessment.

Every year, several cases are filed in the Supreme Court panning the system as non-transparent, open to manipulation and mismanagement. If the matter is brought to court, it takes years to adjudicate. The aggrieved officers do not even find good lawyers to fight their cases. There is a demand that there should be a separate mechanism, such as a tribunal of judges, to deal with such grievances in a time-bound manner.

On an average, there are two or three sessions courts under one High Court judge. This means a senior judge is supervising the work of around 50 judges in a year.

In 2012, the apex court had asked the High Courts to make the process more transparent, fair and efficient. It had said, “Experience has shown that it (ACR) is deficient in several ways, being not comprehensive enough to truly reflect the level of work, conduct and performance of each individual on the one hand and unable to check subjectivity on the other.”

The Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, asked by the law ministry to study the evaluation system, has recommended appraisal of the lower judiciary by an independent entity. The subordinate judiciary has a strength of over 16,000 judges.


  • Punctuality

  • Administrative abilities

  • Strictures

  • Quality of judgments

  • Judgments appealed

  • Litigants’ perspective

  • Judgments overturned


  • An independent entity

  • Judges of the court can evaluate and give feedback on colleagues

  • Practising lawyers

  • Court staff

  • Self-assessment by judges

Stay up to date on all the latest Specials news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

  • Asha Rao

    time taken to dispose the cases should also be evaluated. Is there any administrative policy either to remove or demote them if found deficient in service?
    1 year ago reply
  • Prakash ( not the real one)

    If it comes in practice
    1 year ago reply
  • Ndtv

    Good decision. But I would like to add by the same ratio that also Judge's statistical data must be disclosed in their annual confidential appraisal report (ACAR) to include how many decisions have gone into appeal/revision etc.which succeeded in reversal of earlier decision. Judges with high ratio should be penalized. This will result in better and more responsible judgements ...also HC judges are not infallible and must be subject to ACR too
    1 year ago reply
flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp