review on the project report of Mr Sanjay Salkute

Review on A Pilot Project Report On Mentor Judge

Name: Swapnil Mulmule

Mail address: [email protected]

Education: M.B.A. (HRM)

Occupation: Apex Group of Services, Nasik (working as Management trainee)

Project available on : www.scribd.com/doc/164404083/court-management

Key words:- Court cases backlog, workload in court, executive mentoring in court managment

Background: In Singapore, a Pilot project for Balanced Scorecard was carried out . Singapore Courts believes that the Balanced Scorecard has given employees a superior understanding of the connection between everyday work and the vision and mission. In that pilot project, it was proved that, the scorecard provided a clear advance over the existing performance measurement system.

In India at Thane (Maharashtra) district, a mission to develop Best Practices Guide was launched. The Author individually studied court management by way of adopting executive mentoring to reduce backlog of court cases. The object for the study was on limited point but that affects to other concepts. The author carried out project in the existing circumstances of the system without incorporating changes in the outside world that have direct impact on the functioning of the court.

Literature Review on following aspects:

Pendency of cases : The pilot project is a live projection of court working . For checking the pendency of the cases/ inventory of cases , the author gave importance to qualitative aspect but to count the effect on entire system he considered quantitative verification of cases. His observations are that it is necessary to verify inventory by qualitative and quantitative to find out real effect of project within principles of judicial work.

For quantitative checking, there is staff that is able to count cases as per the inventory sheet maintained by the court. It does not require an expert mind. Even the computer program also counts the number of pending cases . The discussion in the pilot project shows that, only counting a cases by qunatitative method is not a solution to the problem. According to him, it is necessary to verify the reasons for the pendency of cases by counting each and every case and find out the solution to expedite it, its ways.

Non consideration of Hypothesis: Author directly considered the problem without any hypothesis. For hypothesis there is need of creator of present problem. This may be a debatable hypothesis. His material words , “Shifting the blame on judicial system only will not cure such problem” is sufficient to answer that why he did not consider hypothesis.

His views are that the court is a evolutionary system wherein continuous creation process is in existence. Most of creation is a developing case laws. But another side of the coin is backlog of cases. To avoid all these probabilities, the author might have avoided hypothesis because he is well aware that arguments or contradictions or omissions are not a solution to reduce backlog of cases.

Find out Suitable Method: - ADR system is one of the good system as per its object. But the main object of judicial system is to impart justice as per the provisions of laws and its rules. Said work carrying trust of citizens since long.

To find out ways to expedite the cases within judicial preview , it was necessary to interact with the mentee judges by mentor Judge and this reflects from the study of mentoring theory. In fact nobody has ever tried from this angle.

Conducting Sessions: - While conducting mentoring sessions, the project data shows that, the mentor judge verified cases qualitatively and then conducted session by way of discussions of general law , without touching to the personality of the mentee judges. By experiments he explains the situations , how to handle such situations by applying judicial mind. In fact, the author created a picture of rising Sun but did not frame it. Because the Sun is not bounded by any frame. Like this , Author explained picture for situations in the cases/stages of cases , without framing it and therefore the mentee judges were free to solve problems without any directions. It appears that, every judge has his own art & science to deliver justice. It is his individual discipline , so communicating with such mind which are conditioned by different conditions is a very difficult task. Minds of two judges , communication on same concept without touching their individual phenomena, delivered an excellent result and all such pictures reflects from the sessions and meetings.

The tables and further observations speaks that, though the author did not frame situation but he was continuously and closely watching that the disposal should be as per principle of justice.

Factors Affecting to Project Study : -While conducting pilot project the author has discussed other factors that were affecting to the study. He discussed its theory at last section. It does not mean that, the author was unable to study on that point. However from the period of project, whatever time given by mentor and mentee judges , it might not be possible to find out effect of other factors . This might be the reason that, the author requested to play role as mentor judges by retired judges.

Budget for Project : - The author discussed the difference between private sector and public sector. He did not discuss the required cost for pilot project. The require cost for the main project can be calculated at any time from the judicial branch of the district court Thane.

Workload at courts :- At some stage, the author has discussed for workload. He indicated that, mere creating new courts is not perfect solution to reduce pendency. The author has not discussed policy of Government to distribute work load at each court or where there is less workload then what about the existing court with less workload. But it shows that, one of the solution to reduce backlog is work load distribution.

Conclusion:- In the case of regular work , the judges involves activity without any self-interest. It is his duty to adhere to the constitution. For executing the project , the person involved took the mission as their responsibility without any supervision. They took duties to complete task and make the task success. It is their additional task. The dedication, integrity shows the success in management.

The author has safely differentiated that judgment may be art & Science but the management is a based on knowledge and responsibilities. It gave message that managers to become entrepreneurs and make human energies .The author was aware that, such success in project can not be continued forever because it is a creation but last session of the project suggest that, perpetuation of a business is a heart of entrepreneurial task. From the entire project it compels to consider need of genuine theory for business and integrated discipline in the management.

The pilot project is a perfect example which reflects that, Judges are reservoir of experience and they can transmit their experience and knowledge to the society. The pilot project indicates that, the management must concentrate over plans, goals, motivational and psychological tools to get efficient results. Only knowledge of skills and techniques without understanding the heart of management concept , a manager may be good technician and not a manager in true sense. To apply executive mentoring in such a way at the court management is nothing but an invention.

For detailed Review :- http://www.scribd.com/doc/171206861/Review-on-A-Pilot-Project-Report-On-Mentor-Judge

 

[Dhruv Bindhani]

This is a detailed review of a pilot project report titled "Mentor Judge" by Swapnil Mulmule. The review systematically covers the background, methodology, observations, and conclusions of the project, providing a critical analysis of its strengths and areas for further consideration.

---

Project Background and Objectives​

The report introduces a pilot project conducted in Thane, India, aimed at reducing court case backlog through executive mentoring, drawing inspiration from Singapore's "Balanced Scorecard" success in court management. The author, Swapnil Mulmule, a Management Trainee, undertook this study with a "limited point" objective: to apply executive mentoring in the existing court system without external changes. This immediate focus on internal mechanisms, while specific, might also be seen as a limitation, as external factors can significantly impact court functioning.

---

Methodological Approach and Key Observations​

The literature review section highlights the author's emphasis on both qualitative and quantitative verification of case pendency, an important distinction from mere quantitative counting. Mulmule argues that understanding the reasons for backlog, rather than just the numbers, is crucial for finding solutions. A notable aspect discussed is the "non-consideration of hypothesis," with the author justifying this by stating the problem is not about "blaming the judicial system" but rather acknowledging the court as an "evolutionary system" with continuous creation (developing case laws and backlog). This philosophical stance suggests a practical, solution-oriented approach over theoretical debate.

The project's innovation lies in its "Suitable Method," which involved mentor judges interacting with mentee judges to find ways to expedite cases within judicial preview, an approach described as previously untried. The "Conducting Sessions" section beautifully describes the mentor judge's qualitative verification of cases, followed by discussions of general law "without touching to the personality of the mentee judges." This indirect, experimental approach, creating "a picture of rising Sun but did not frame it," allowed mentee judges freedom in applying their "own art & science to deliver justice," leading to "excellent results." This methodology underscores a deep respect for individual judicial discipline while still guiding towards efficient disposal aligned with justice principles.

---

Factors Affecting the Study and Broader Implications​

The report acknowledges "Factors Affecting to Project Study," noting that time constraints likely prevented a full assessment of these external influences, suggesting a role for retired judges as mentors in future phases. A point of critique is the lack of discussion on the "Budget for Project," though the author claims the cost can be calculated from the judicial branch. The article also touches upon "Workload at courts," indicating that simply creating new courts isn't a perfect solution and hinting at the importance of workload distribution, though this isn't fully developed.

---

Conclusion and Future Vision​

The conclusion strongly emphasizes the dedication and integrity of the judges involved, who undertook this project as an "additional task" driven by responsibility rather than self-interest. Mulmule effectively differentiates between the "art & science" of judgment and the "knowledge and responsibilities" of management. The project conveys a powerful message: managers should become "entrepreneurs" who energize human potential. The author's awareness that such "success in project can not be continued forever because it is a creation" leads to the concept of "perpetuation of a business" as the "heart of entrepreneurial task," hinting at the need for a sustained, integrated management discipline in the judiciary.

Ultimately, the pilot project is presented as an "invention," showcasing judges as "reservoir of experience" capable of transmitting knowledge to society. It highlights that effective management in the judicial context requires focus on "plans, goals, motivational and psychological tools," emphasizing that true managers are more than just technicians. The review portrays Mulmule's project as a significant step towards innovative court management, particularly through the novel application of executive mentoring.