The mystery of Court 10
UPSC Study Note: The Mystery of Court 10 — Supreme Court of India
1. At a Glance
- Court 10 is a courtroom inside the Supreme Court of India (SCI) complex that remains perpetually empty and closed, appearing as a "white space" on the causelist (daily case list) while all 16 other active courts carry full dockets. [S1]
- The topic is examined under GS-II (Judiciary / Governance) and is a lens into judicial infrastructure utilisation, administrative opacity, and the functioning of India's apex court.
- The article, a first-person reportorial essay by Krishnadas Rajagopal (Senior Legal Correspondent, The Hindu), signals the broader issue of under-utilised court infrastructure at a time of crippling judicial pendency.
- Why UPSC cares: Questions on Supreme Court structure, pendency, judicial reform, and infrastructure regularly appear in both Prelims and Mains. [S2]
2. Why in the News
- Published 23 January 2026 (The Hindu, Print Edition, Page 9) as a feature essay. [S1]
- Trigger: Growing media and civil-society attention to judicial infrastructure utilisation amid the Government's push to increase judge strength (Cabinet approved raising SCI judges from 33 to 37 in 2024) [S2] and the e-Courts Phase III rollout. [S3]
- Juxtaposition: At a moment when tens of millions of cases clog Indian courts and the government is investing billions in new court halls, the SCI's own Court 10 sits idle — making for pointed journalistic irony.
3. Background & Evolution
| Year | Milestone |
|---|---|
| 1950 | Supreme Court of India established under Article 124 of the Constitution; initially sat at the Chamber of Princes, Parliament House |
| 1958 | SCI shifted to its present purpose-built premises on Tilak Marg, New Delhi (architect: Ganesh Bhikaji Deolalikar) |
| 1979 | First major expansion — East Wing and West Wing added, increasing courtroom capacity |
| 1994 | Second extension to the original building |
| 2015 | Additional expansion; total courtrooms reached 19 (though not all are used simultaneously) |
| 2024 | Cabinet approves increase in sanctioned judge strength from 33 to 37 [S2] |
| 2026 | Despite increased judge strength, Court 10 remains closed [S1] |
4. Core Static Facts
- Location: Supreme Court of India, Tilak Marg, New Delhi — 110001
- Parent Constitutional provision: Article 124 (Establishment and Constitution of Supreme Court); Article 130 (Seat of Supreme Court)
- Controlling authority: Supreme Court of India (its own administrative arm — the Secretary-General's Office)
- Total courtrooms in SCI complex: ~19 (sources vary; article implies 17 are currently operational — "the other 16 courts" plus Court 10) [S1]
- Causelist: A daily publication listing cases fixed for hearing before each Bench; Court 10 does not appear on the causelist [S1]
- Judge strength (post-2024 Cabinet decision): Sanctioned strength raised to 37 (from 33) [S2]
- e-Courts integration: SCI onboarded to National Judicial Data Grid (NJJDG) for real-time case-status tracking [S3]
- Infrastructure scheme: Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for Development of Infrastructure Facilities for Judiciary (operative since 1993–94) — funds court halls, residential quarters, digital rooms, lawyer halls [S4]
5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis
Legal / Constitutional
- The SCI derives its administrative autonomy from the doctrine of separation of powers and judicial independence — decisions on courtroom allocation are internal, insulated from executive scrutiny. [S1]
- No statutory provision mandates public disclosure on why a courtroom is deactivated; this feeds the "opacity" the article alludes to.
- Article 145 empowers the SCI to frame its own rules for the conduct of business — courtroom assignment is an exercise of this rule-making power.
Governance / Administrative
- The article exposes an information asymmetry: even seasoned court reporters cannot obtain a straight answer about Court 10's status. [S1]
- Amid 5.1 crore+ pending cases across Indian courts (as per NJJDG data), the sight of an idle SCI courtroom raises questions about resource optimisation.
- The CSS scheme has funded a 41% increase in court halls nationally (from ~15,818 in 2014 to ~22,372 by 2023) [S4], yet the bottleneck often lies not in physical space but in judicial appointments and roster management.
Historical
- The SCI building was designed (1958) for a far smaller bench and docket. Expansion by accretion (wings added in 1979, 1994, 2015) means some spaces may be structurally or procedurally "inherited" without active assignment.
- Court rooms in Indian High Courts have historically been opened/closed based on the sitting strength of judges vis-à-vis sanctioned strength — a persistent gap.
Ethical / Governance
- The "hem and haw" response from court officials reported in the article [S1] raises a governance concern: even in the nation's apex judicial body, routine administrative transparency is absent.
- The poet Pierre-Albert Birot is invoked in the article — "The world pulse beats beyond my door" — to symbolise Court 10's existential removal from the live churn of litigation. [S1]
Economic
- Capital expenditure on judicial infrastructure is substantial; PIB data shows government has funded 22,372 court halls and 19,851 residential units nationally [S4]. An idle courtroom at the apex court represents an opportunity cost in symbolic and fiscal terms.
6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)
- 2024: Cabinet approval to increase Supreme Court judges from 33 to 37, the first such enhancement since 2019 [S2]; this is expected to operationalise additional Benches, potentially opening hitherto-closed courts.
- 2025 (ongoing): e-Courts Phase III rollout includes SCI onboarding to NJJDG, enabling real-time tracking of case-status for 3,293+ court complexes [S3].
- January 2026: The Hindu's Krishnadas Rajagopal publishes a feature article specifically flagging Court 10's mystery — the first traceable media piece dedicated to this administrative curiosity [S1].
- 2025–26: National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India (NJIAI) framework being operationalised post-PIB announcement in 2022 [S4] — aims to standardise court infrastructure planning nationwide.
7. Prelims Hooks
- The Supreme Court of India was established under Article 124 of the Constitution on 26 January 1950.
- The SCI's current building was inaugurated in 1958, designed by architect Ganesh Bhikaji Deolalikar.
- The seat of the Supreme Court is determined under Article 130 — it is Delhi (unless the CJI, with Presidential approval, appoints another place).
- Cabinet approved increasing Supreme Court judge strength from 33 to 37 in 2024 [S2].
- The Centrally Sponsored Scheme for judicial infrastructure has been operational since 1993–94 [S4].
- Court hall availability increased from ~15,818 (2014) to ~22,372 (2023) — a 41.43% increase [S4].
- The National Judicial Data Grid (NJJDG) was extended to include the SCI following the e-Courts Phase III rollout [S3].
- The causelist (list of cases for the day) is the primary scheduling document in SCI; Court 10 does not appear on it [S1].
- National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India (NJIAI) was announced by PIB to standardise judicial infrastructure planning [S4].
- The SCI building first underwent expansion in 1979 (East and West Wings) and again in 1994 and 2015.
- Article 145 of the Constitution empowers the SCI to frame rules regulating its own procedure and conduct of business.
- The feature on Court 10 was written by Krishnadas Rajagopal and published on 23 January 2026 in The Hindu [S1].
8. Mains Relevance
GS Paper: GS-II (Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice)
Syllabus headings: - Structure, organisation and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary - Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability - Judicial reforms and pendency
Plausible Mains Question Stems:
-
"Administrative opacity within constitutional institutions poses as significant a challenge to judicial reform as pendency itself." Critically examine with reference to the functioning of the Supreme Court of India. (GS-II, 15 marks)
-
"Expanding judge strength without proportionate improvements in court management and infrastructure utilisation risks being a cosmetic reform." Discuss in the context of recent developments in India's judicial infrastructure. (GS-II, 10 marks)
-
"The gap between sanctioned judicial infrastructure and its actual utilisation reflects deeper administrative dysfunctions in India's court system." Analyse. (GS-II, 15 marks)
9. Related Topics to Study Next
| Topic | Connection |
|---|---|
| Judicial Pendency & Backlog | Core context — 5 crore+ pending cases make idle courtrooms particularly significant |
| e-Courts Mission Mode Project (Phase III) | Direct policy response to judicial delay; SCI's NJJDG integration is linked [S3] |
| National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Judgment | Defines how judge strength and appointments are controlled, bearing on courtroom activation |
| Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Judicial Infrastructure | The funding mechanism behind courtroom construction — origin 1993–94 [S4] |
| Article 124 & 130 — SC Establishment & Seat | Static constitutional basis; frequently tested in Prelims |
| National Judicial Infrastructure Authority of India (NJIAI) | Proposed apex body for court infrastructure — directly relevant [S4] |
| Chief Justice of India's Roster Power | The CJI's exclusive power to assign cases and allocate Benches — the administrative act that determines which courts are used |
| Law Commission Reports on Judicial Reform | Background for any Mains answer on pendency, judge strength, and court management |
10. Common Errors / Trap Areas
- Confusing courtroom count with judge strength: The SCI has ~19 courtrooms but only 34 judges (post-2024 appointment pending); not all courts need be open simultaneously — aspirants wrongly assume 1:1 parity.
- Wrong ministry for judicial infrastructure: The CSS for Judicial Infrastructure is implemented by the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice — not the Ministry of Home Affairs.
- Confusing Article 124 with Article 130: Article 124 establishes the SCI; Article 130 deals with its seat (location). Questions often test these separately.
- Assuming NJJAI/NJIAI is a constitutional body: It is a statutory/executive proposal announced via PIB — it is not a Constitutional body like the NHRC or Election Commission.
- Overstating the article's scope: "The mystery of Court 10" is a feature essay, not an investigative report with a definitive answer — aspirants should not invent a "reason" (renovation, security concerns, etc.) that the article itself does not confirm. The mystery remains unresolved in the piece. [S1]
11. Sources
- [S1] Krishnadas Rajagopal, "The mystery of Court 10" — The Hindu, 23 January 2026, Print Edition Page 9 — https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/2026-01-23/th_international/articleGBHFFOHNN-13209601.ece — (Tier 4)
- [S2] PIB, "Cabinet approves increase in the Judge strength of the Supreme Court of India by Four to 37 from 33" — https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2258131 — (Tier 1)
- [S3] PIB, "The flagship e-Courts project completes full circle with Supreme Court of India onboarding the National Judicial Data Grid portal" — https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1957318 — (Tier 1)
- [S4] PIB, "Infrastructure development for Judiciary" — https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2151247 — (Tier 1)
Note to aspirant: This topic is best treated as a current-affairs hook into judiciary structure and judicial reform rather than a self-contained scheme. Pair it with a revision of Articles 124–147 (Judiciary chapter) and the e-Courts/NJIAI framework for a comprehensive Mains answer.