Court Managers Play a Critical Role in Judicial Administration: Supreme Court Issues Pan-India Directions for Regularization and Service Uniformity

“If they are not made permanent and are to be thrown away at this stage, it would cause a great hardship to them.” — Supreme Court on Court Managers Awaiting Regularisation

In a significant decision on May 16, 2025, the Supreme Court of India ruled decisively and mandating regularisation of Court Managers across the country and ordering the framing of uniform service rules. Recognising their critical role in judicial administration, the Court declared:

“Professionally qualified Court Managers, preferably with an MBA degree, must also be appointed to render assistance in performing the court administration.”

The Court issued sweeping directives binding on all High Courts and State Governments, holding that the Assam Rules of 2018 shall be treated as the model framework for such rules. The judgment marks a crucial step toward improving the administrative efficiency of courts and securing the long-standing service rights of Court Managers.

The position of Court Manager was introduced based on recommendations of the 13th Finance Commission (2010–2015) to enhance judicial productivity by providing administrative assistance to judges. The Finance Commission allocated ₹300 crore for this innovation and emphasized its potential in supporting judicial administration.

Despite the importance attached to the post, most States failed to institutionalise it. Court Managers were appointed on contractual or ad hoc terms, with no service protection, career advancement, or allowances. The SNJPC Report (2022) and the Court’s earlier ruling in 2018 had already urged regularisation and standardisation of service terms.

Yet, neglect continued, leading to intervention applications filed by Sachin Kumar Gupta & Others, the Court Manager Welfare Association, and Lokesh Kumar, all seeking recognition, regularisation, and pay parity.

 “Uniformity in Service Conditions and Regularisation Cannot Be Delayed Any Further”

Framing the issue for adjudication, the Court asked: “Whether in light of the Thirteenth Finance Commission, SNJPC Report and the judgment of this Court in the present proceedings dated 2nd August 2018, any further direction needs to be issued to various High Courts and State Governments for framing and implementation of rules for the Court Managers.”

In response, the Court held: “The services of any person already working as a Court Manager in any district should be regularised by the State Government as we are of the considered view that their assistance is needed for a proper administrative set-up in a court.”

The Court condemned the failure of several State Governments and High Courts to comply with its 2018 directive and took judicial notice of some states even choosing to discontinue the post altogether, citing lack of funds. The Court firmly rebutted such justifications: “We are at pains to say that… various High Courts and various State Governments have not yet complied with the said direction.”

“Some of the State Governments have decided to discontinue the post of Court Managers citing the ground of shortage of funds.”

“Assam Rules of 2018 to Be the Model for All High Courts”: Court Calls for Time-Bound Reforms

The judgment emphasized that uniformity in service conditions across all States is imperative. The Assam Rules of 2018, which provide for regular cadre appointment, clear pay scales, allowances, and defined responsibilities, were hailed as exemplary:

“We find that the Assam Rules of 2018 should be considered as the model rules when the other High Courts frame their rules.”

The Court mandated that: “All the High Courts in the country shall frame or amend the rules providing for recruitment and conditions of service of Court Managers, by taking the Assam Rules of 2018 as the model Rules… within a period of 3 months.”

“Upon receipt of the rules framed or amendments thereof by the High Courts, the respective State Governments shall finalise and grant approval to the same within a further period of 3 months.”

Further, recognising the stagnation and frustration caused by lack of promotion prospects, the Court recommended: “If promotional avenues are available, it will lead to better performance and efficiency of the Court Managers.”

It also encouraged States to adopt either a promotion structure or Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme.

“No Justification to Throw Away Experienced Managers”: Regularisation with Retrospective Effect Ordered

The Court found it unjust to discard experienced Court Managers who had spent years in service on temporary terms: “If they are not made permanent and are to be thrown away at this stage, it would cause a great hardship to them.”

To balance fairness with merit, the Court directed a suitability test be conducted. Those who pass would be: “Entitled to regularisation from the date of their initial appointment.”

However, on the issue of monetary benefits, the Court clarified:

“They would not be entitled for the arrears, if any, on account of difference between salary for the period from the date on which they are working till the date of their actual regularization.”

It also fixed personal responsibility on Registrar Generals and Chief Secretaries to adhere to the six-month timeline for rule finalisation and implementation.

The judgment in All India Judges Association v. Union of India is a watershed moment for judicial administration in India, giving long-overdue recognition and protection to Court Managers. The Court reaffirmed their necessity:

“The post of Court Managers must be created in each judicial district… These Court Managers would also help in identifying the weaknesses in the court management systems.”

By granting retrospective regularisation and directing uniform rules nationwide, the Court has not only safeguarded the dignity and future of Court Managers but also strengthened the administrative spine of the Indian judiciary.

Date of Decision:May 16, 2025