For decades, Indian judges have enjoyed weeks-long vacations during which courts would be shut, but this practice is slowly coming into question.
In a candid critique of India’s judicial system, Sanjeev Sanyal, member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), has called for sweeping cultural reforms in how the country’s judiciary operates. His remarks highlight longstanding concerns about archaic practices and institutional inefficiencies that may be hindering the delivery of justice in the world’s largest democracy.
The ‘My Lord’ Culture: A Democratic Disconnect
Sanyal’s most pointed criticism targets the hierarchical language that permeates Indian courtrooms. “We need a culture change in the way people use the way, the whole thinking about this profession works,” he stated. “You cannot have a profession where you use words like my Lord, or when you’re doing a petition, it’s called a prayer. You’ve got to be kidding me.”
This observation strikes at the heart of India’s colonial judicial legacy. The practice of addressing judges as “My Lord” or “Your Lordship” is a remnant from British colonial rule, where such honorifics were used in English courts. While many former colonies have moved away from these traditions, India’s legal system has retained them, creating what Sanyal describes as an inappropriate power dynamic.
“We are all citizens of the same democratic republic, it is not appropriate for one citizen to call another citizen, my Lord, or to pray to them. It is not acceptable and we have got to end this,” Sanyal emphasized.
The terminology extends beyond mere titles. Legal petitions are formally called “prayers” to the court, further reinforcing a quasi-religious reverence that sits uncomfortably with democratic principles. This language creates an institutional culture where judges are placed on pedestals, potentially impacting the accessibility and approachability of the justice system for ordinary citizens.
The Vacation Question: Public Service or Private Practice?
Perhaps more direct is Sanyal’s critique of the Indian judiciary’s vacation schedule. Indian courts traditionally observe extended breaks during summer, winter, and other periods, effectively shutting down the entire system except for vacation benches that handle only urgent matters.
“It also have to end this whole custom of having these long vacations. I’m sorry, this cannot go on. The judiciary is a public service like any other part of the state,” Sanyal argued.
To illustrate his point, he drew comparisons with other essential services: “I also work in the government. I also take vacations, but the judges are very happy for them to take vacations. But why should the entire court system be shut down for this? After all, the police men also take vacations. I also take vacations. Do you shut down the entire police department for this?”
A Comparison with Other Professions
Sanyal’s analogy with healthcare is particularly striking: “Let’s say some other profession does this. Let’s say the doctors decide that we will take summer vacations, the share a vacation, winter vacation, and shut down the hospitals for large part of the time, and we will have vacation benches for emergency cases. Would that be acceptable?”
This comparison reveals a fundamental question about how public services should operate. In most career sectors, individual employees take staggered leave while maintaining operational continuity. Banks don’t shut down for months, hospitals continue operating, and government offices maintain skeleton staff during holidays. Yet the judiciary’s approach effectively pauses the administration of justice for extended periods.
For legal professionals, this system creates unique career challenges. Lawyers must plan their practices around court calendars, affecting their earning potential and client relationships. Court staff, litigants, and the entire legal ecosystem must adapt to a schedule that prioritizes institutional convenience over public service delivery.
Impact on Career Opportunities and Professional Culture
The current system has broader implications for legal careers in India. Young lawyers often find their professional development stalled during extended court closures, while senior practitioners may structure their practices around these predictable downtimes. The hierarchical culture, reinforced by colonial-era protocols, can also impact professional relationships and career advancement within the legal fraternity.
Moreover, the extended vacation system affects case backlogs—a persistent challenge in Indian courts. With millions of cases pending across the country’s judicial system, any reduction in working days exacerbates delays that can stretch legal proceedings over years or even decades.
The Path Forward
Sanyal’s critique raises important questions about modernizing India’s judicial system for the 21st century. “Why is it acceptable then for something that is effectively the responsibility of the state and as a citizen, something I should expect from the state and particular branch of the state?” he questioned.
The issues he raises—ceremonial hierarchy and institutional scheduling—may seem procedural, but they reflect deeper questions about the judiciary’s role in a modern democracy. As India’s economy grows and its legal system handles increasingly complex commercial and social disputes, these structural inefficiencies could become more pronounced.
Reform advocates argue that changes to both language protocols and vacation schedules could make the justice system more accessible, efficient, and democratic. However, such changes would require overcoming decades of institutional tradition and convincing stakeholders across the legal system.
Sanyal’s comments, coming from a senior government advisor, suggest that judicial reform may be gaining attention at the highest levels of government. Whether this translates into concrete policy changes remains to be seen, but the conversation he has sparked highlights the evolving expectations of public service in contemporary India.
The debate over judicial culture and efficiency reflects broader questions about institutional modernization that many career sectors in India are grappling with. As the country continues its economic and social transformation, the pressure for traditional institutions to adapt and reform is likely to intensify.