A Judicial Performance Evaluation for Realization of Transparency and Accountability of The Administration of Justice in India

Abstract

The Depth Of Proficient And Value Justice Require Consideration To Three Fundamentals: The Legal Norms That Government Is Projected To Implement; The Method In Which Courts Find Facts And Apply Substantive Law To Those Facts; And Judicial Management, The Practice And Measures By Which Courts Take Cognizance Of Disputes And Present Them To Judicial Decision-Makers For Disposition. While These Three Area Are Interconnected And Should Be Considered As A Whole During Reforms, The Essential Focus (Of This Study) Is Judicial Administration. . The Practical Question In The Context Of Judiciary For Us Can Be "How Does A Court Perform?" For The Understanding Of The Hope And Prospect Of Common Men. India Stressing For A New Standard, Judicial Performance Index, To Integrate The Most Excellent Practices Followed Around The World.¹⁰ Also, The "Global Measure Of Court Performance" Set Various "Operational Terms" To Realize "Transparency And Accountability" Of The Administration Of Justice. There Are Differences Between, Judicial Reform, Justice Administration And Judicial Evaluation. While Judicial Reform Can Be A Set, Management Of Justice And Performance Assessment Of Judges Can Be Sub-Sets. For Each Of These, Different Indicators Should Be In Practice And Those Shall Harmonize Each Other In Various Ways To Make Justice Meaningful. The International Structure For Court Quality For A Excellence Management System Designed By The International Appraise Of Court Performance For The Policymakers Has Identifies 10 Core Court-Values And 11 Measurable Tools. The Significant Question That Arises How Far These Operational Values Are Helpful In Indian Judicial Practice. In Developing A Performance Evaluation Policy For India, There Must Be A Two-Sided Approach: The Assessment Of The Individual Judges, As Well As The Appraisal Of Court Functioning.