Review on : A Pilot Project Report On Mentor Judge, To Decrease Old Pendency And Increase Rate Of Disposal In Civil Judge

Junior Division And J.M.F.C.Courts , At Bhiwandi Citation: http://www.scribd.com/doc/164404083/Court-Management Review by: Swapnil Mulmule Education: M.B.A (HRM) Working at :- Apex Group of Services email address: swapnilmulmule@gmail.com Key Words:- mentoring, mentor judges, reduce backlog of court cases, mentoring Judge to Judge Basic Summary: In the district court the mission to develop Best Practices Guide was established to reduce backlog of cases. From the pilot project it shows that, the author independently decided to solve the problem by adopting executive mentoring method. Pilot project was to reduce backlog of court cases at the civil judge junior division . It also shows that, the author himself was Mentor Judge and other judges were Mentee Judges. The author gave a correct reason to adopt the executive mentoring .i.e. to give equal treatment to the mentee judges. In the entire project , Judges were really an active participant and it shows strong support from them. The previous collected data shows the huge pendency of the cases and rate of its disposal. At the end the Pilot project gave excellent result. There is ample evidence that strong leadership and commitment has been a key element of success of the project. Background Indian Judicial System is the largest system . The Data for Number of courts, Judges etc are available on the websites. The backlog of cases and efforts taken through ADR system is also available on the Websites. The pilot project as carried out indicates that, such type of project might not been carried out through executive mentoring system. The project is highlighted by a number of facts, including: The physical locations where the system is useful. The mentor judges to be trained. The number of stakeholders, who must be engaged, managed. Current Status The status of cases are discussed in the project. The previous data, disposal of cases are shown in the charts attached with the project. Huge pendency is disclosed and need to reduce backlog of old cases are more concentrated. The current status is that the working is continue as per routine line. Any new method or system was might not have been implemented as per the concept of management. Though the effects of computerization in case management are not discussed but the cause list shows the position of cases, method to call case in court etc.

Scope of the Review This review is conducted merely from data presented in the pilot project . Unless system is verified , it is not possible to reach on any other opinion. But from the table and sessions described in the project, the scope of review is for broad questions. 1. Is any value to the system ? 2. Will the system work ? 3. Is the project is costly ? It shows that, there is no observations for required cost for the project. There is no observation about the time spent by mentor Judge or Mentee. But it shows that, there are many contributions to project success , including the time given by mentee judge, staff, other machineries. Areas for large scale :Project Management: The project has to be managed as per best practices. Cost Management: The cost and its management or controlled has to be carried out. Technology Review: CIS software response has to be calculated. Implementation Facilities: Implementation facilities has to be disclosed for the success of project. Methodology for the Review The actual execution of session its results are compared with the tables for output shown in the project. No need to verify the actual area again when such sufficient evidence is produced in the project report. Focus area found are : 1.Project plan is as per documentation. 2.There is evidence that the plan is adequate and used effectively. 3.Risk about the honesty of mentor and mentee, resistance to change demonstrated in the project. 4.The project reflects that, the mentor has conducted meeting jointly or separately with the mentee judges, staff and most of difficulties are solved at initial stage. Review Framework In the project report detailed findings and recommendations are mentioned. Stages discussed are as: 1.Physical Verification of Court cases and case load; 2.Additional responsibilities of the mentor and mentee; 3.Sessions conducting- planning, executing, ending ; 4.Meetings with stakeholders ; 5.Execution: The project has strong backing at the District level of the Judicial Branch.

Hypotheses: No any imaginary question is taken but the author took core problem and concentrated towards ADR . Data Source and Method of Collection: The court record was primary data and secondary data taken from the websites as given in the project . It also shows that, the author collected data from Direct observation , executive mentoring sessions and meetings etc as primary data. Separation of Courts The author gave more importance to the physical verification of court cases by quantitative and qualitative means . But his further observation reflects that, the effect of project can be evaluated from quantitative physical verification. He observed the balance sheets to ascertain the actual back log and flow of new cases. His observation for concentrating as pilot courts and non-piloting courts on the particular type of cases and other factors were his preparation for executive mentoring sessions and its mode. Method of Analysis: It was live guidance to the than any directions. Major Findings: Author realizes different experience therefore he observed each court separately. He drawn ratio for reducing backlog of cases and ADR system for both pilot and non-pilot court . In the project the process, experiments are discussed . Caseload shows the number of cases assigned to each court with staff . Workload is the amount of work required to successfully manage assigned cases and bring them to resolution. Workload reflects the average time it takes to (1) do the work required for each assigned case; and (2) complete other non-casework responsibilities. In fact, for workload studies as he discussed need of more staff as per the compendium . He has discussed the theory about staffing, improving efficiency of staff. But he has not discussed impact of such aspects in his project. Project shows that, by managing work expectations, that lead to higher work satisfactory and also encourages morally to the staff of the court. Author could discuss about time management i.e. to prepare list prioritizing the material hearing, Set goals to decide the matter within limitation and on this aspects some experiments on mentee judges. The effective mentoring shows the ability and

willingness to the value the mentee as a person wherein the mentee solved his own problem rather

SMART was expected, prioritizing important works, experiments about minimizing distractions and managing interruptions, experiments of getting more disposal if matter of same types are kept on same day, Time scheduling for more important work at peak time, less important at down time. The author could show experiments for effective ways of improving reducing more backlog and increase in disposal by recognizing and rectifying time management mistake within less stress. For Change management the reason is not given to the resistance . For performance management, the author suggested a good system that may be by-product of the project process. Lastly, the author discussed that, now it is a time to find out difference between recruitment and talent acquisition. Conclusions: The pilot project can not be challenged due to its scope, schedule, cost, control. However if such project has to be executed for other courts than junior courts then the method of teaching/subjects may change . It should be continuous project and not for specific period.

From the Live Pilot Project it appears that, the author has presented Judicial system as a live body. He has expanded scope of word Court from Noun to Verb. He has treated the Judge as a Soul, Court management as a Heart. Calculated figures shows that, the rate of reducing backlog and increase in performance in a existing circumstances. Such project could get more excellent result if the barriers does not come i.e. time management, change management, Caseloadworkload management . It being pilot project wherein preliminary testing of resolving problem is given and it may give more beneficial result in main study. This might be reason that, the above some aspects that were not foreseen before conducting pilot study and so it gives chances of getting clear findings in the main study. This project may be able to make needed alterations in the data collection method to analyze in the main study more efficiently. But it greatly reduces the unanticipated problems and gives an opportunity to redesign any part of study to overcome difficulties that the pilot study described. Such project saves lot of time , money and energy. The project provided enough data for researcher to go ahead main study. In the pilot project the author used executive mentoring but has given scope for main study to select any other method to get more better result. Overall, from entire project it reflects that, the main study may or may not be carried out But in the existing circumstances the Author applied the executive mentoring method wherein he identified potential practical problems in following the research procedure and what exactly was learnt. It is Welldesigned and well-conducted pilot studies.

Scope of Services : The management must have humans, communication, and a positive enterprise endeavor. It shows that, necessary components are , Plans, measurements, motivational psychological tools, goals . What I mean the author resolved the problem not by developing a theory only but has given experimental evidence. It is excellent and extraordinary work. It is a greatest contributions in the field of Management.