Reforming Administrative Nomenclature in the Indian Judiciary
"Reforming Administrative Nomenclature in the Indian Judiciary"
Published by the Centre for Research and Planning, Supreme Court of India (November 2025)
A Landmark Initiative for Dignity and Equality
In a significant step towards aligning its internal practices with the nation's highest constitutional values, the Supreme Court of India, through its Centre for Research and Planning (CRP), has released a comprehensive report titled "Reforming Administrative Nomenclature in the Indian Judiciary: Embedding Dignity and Equity in Service Rules."
This groundbreaking report addresses a critical paradox: while the Indian Judiciary is the guardian of the Constitution, which guarantees equality, dignity, and fraternity, its own administrative rules often use outdated, hierarchical, and caste-based job titles inherited from the colonial era.
What is the Core Issue?
The report identifies that the Service Rules of the Supreme Court and various High Courts continue to use administrative terms that are archaic, insensitive, and perpetuate historical hierarchies. Words like ‘Peon’, ‘Jamadar’, ‘Coolie’, ‘Scavenger’, ‘Halalkhor’, and ‘Court Servant’ are not merely bureaucratic labels. The report argues they function as active instruments of ‘symbolic violence’, subtly reinforcing caste-based servitude, colonial subordination, and a culture of inequality within the very institution meant to uphold justice.
These terms violate the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India, including:
Article 14 (Equality before Law): By creating arbitrary and demeaning classifications.
Article 15 & 16 (Prohibition of Discrimination): By using caste-coded language for certain jobs.
Article 17 (Abolition of Untouchability): By linguistically retaining terms associated with "polluting" labour.
Article 21 (Right to Life and Dignity): By undermining the self-respect and professional identity of employees.
Key Insights from the Report
Language is Not Neutral: The report establishes that administrative language is a powerful social tool that shapes perception, legitimacy, and institutional culture. Outdated nomenclature ‘naturalises’ inequality, making it seem normal and unchangeable.
A Colonial and Casteist Legacy: A thorough etymological analysis traces how many of these terms originate from British administrative and military structures or are directly drawn from caste-based hereditary occupations.
The Harm is Real and Constitutional: The continued use of this lexicon inflicts dignitary harm, causing ‘misrecognition’ and humiliation for the staff, thereby corroding the constitutional morale of the judiciary.
The Path to Reform: A New Lexicon of Respect
The report does not just critique; it provides a clear, actionable roadmap for reform. Guided by the constitutional conscience and theoretical frameworks, it proposes replacing the outdated terms with a new, dignified nomenclature based on the principles of Functionality, Neutrality, Professionalism, Dignity, and Inclusivity.
Examples of Proposed Changes:
Outdated TermProposed Dignified AlternativePeon / OrderlyOffice Assistant / Court AttendantScavenger / HalalkhorSanitation AttendantJamadarOperations Supervisor / UsherCourt ServantJudicial Support StaffChowkidarSecurity PersonnelCoolieFreight AssistantBhisti / WatermanWater Supply Assistant
This transformation is envisioned as a ‘symbolic act of justice’—a crucial step in decolonizing the judiciary's language and ensuring its internal practices reflect the same values of equality and fraternity that it expects from the nation.
Conclusion: Towards a More Just Judiciary
This seminal report from the Supreme Court of India’s research centre is more than a call for semantic change. It is a profound affirmation that justice must not only be delivered but also be spoken in the very words an institution uses. By reforming its administrative lexicon, the judiciary can:
Honour the dignity of every individual who contributes to its functioning.
Bridge the gap between its constitutional ideals and its institutional practices.
Reinforce its role as a model employer and the ultimate sentinel of constitutional values.
The report lays the foundation for a coordinated, nationwide reform, paving the way for a judiciary that is truly inclusive, equitable, and dignified in both its judgments and its jargon.
Disclaimer:
This summary is based on the report "Reforming Administrative Nomenclature in the Indian Judiciary: Embedding Dignity and Equity in Service Rules" prepared by the Centre for Research and Planning (CRP) of the Supreme Court of India. The insights, analysis, and proposed nomenclature are credited to the authors and researchers of the original report. For a complete understanding, readers are encouraged to refer to the full document.