Allahabad High Court Says Judges Cannot Function Like ‘Super Robots’ Amid Massive Case Backlog
By Rajesh Pandey
In a sharp and strongly worded observation on the mounting pressure faced by the judiciary, the Allahabad High Court remarked that judges cannot be expected to function like “super robots” while litigants and government authorities continue to ignore binding court orders as though they were merely “decorative pieces of paper.”
The remarks were made by Justice Kshitij Shailendra while holding the District Inspector of Schools (DIOS), Ghazipur, Prakash Singh, guilty of contempt of court for failing to comply with an interim judicial order passed nearly four years ago regarding the payment of an employee’s salary.
The case arose from a writ petition filed in 2017 by Radhey Shyam Yadav, who had approached the High Court seeking relief over salary-related grievances.
On April 18, 2022, the writ court directed the concerned state authorities to ensure payment of his salary during the pendency of the petition.
However, despite the clear direction, the order remained unimplemented for years, ultimately leading to contempt proceedings before the court.
During the hearing, the state sought deferment of the contempt proceedings on the ground that an application seeking vacation of the interim stay order was still pending consideration.
The court, however, firmly rejected the request and underscored the importance of compliance with judicial orders unless they are formally modified or set aside by a competent court.
Justice Kshitij Shailendra used the occasion to express concern over the extraordinary burden carried by constitutional courts, particularly the Allahabad High Court, one of the country’s busiest judicial institutions.
In his observations, the judge painted a stark picture of the realities faced daily by the judiciary.
The court noted that in heavily burdened constitutional courts like the Allahabad High Court, judges routinely deal with extraordinarily long cause lists.
According to the order, anywhere between 400 to 800 cases — and sometimes even more — are listed before a single judge on a given day.
Such overwhelming pendency, the court observed, inevitably results in delays, with some cases taking years and occasionally even decades to reach final resolution.
Despite these challenges, Justice Shailendra observed that society often expects judges to perform beyond human limits.
He remarked that overburdened judges are frequently expected to function like “ever-working super robots, super computers, or super-human beings,” despite operating under immense institutional pressure and limited time.
The judge further warned that if parties are allowed to openly disregard operative judicial directions during the pendency of proceedings, the entire justice delivery system would collapse into disorder.
He stressed that the rule of law cannot survive if litigants selectively choose which court orders to obey and which to ignore.
In one of the strongest passages of the order, the court stated that permitting such defiance would push the administration of justice towards “chaos and anarchy.”
The judge emphasized that the law does not tolerate such audacity and that compliance with judicial directions is fundamental to maintaining constitutional governance.
In the detailed order dated May 19, the High Court also highlighted that the authority and dignity of the judiciary ultimately rest on public faith in the institution and on the effective enforcement of court orders.
Any erosion of that discipline, the court cautioned, would weaken not just individual judgments but the very foundations of democratic and constitutional accountability.
The observations have drawn attention within legal circles for candidly acknowledging the enormous workload faced by judges while simultaneously reinforcing the principle that court orders are binding and cannot be treated casually by government officials or litigants.
