Before His Retirement, Chief Justice BR Gavai Urged High Courts To Amend Caste-Coded, Colonial Job Titles

Before demitting office, Justice B.R. Gavai, former Chief Justice of India, wrote to all Chief Justices of High Courts urging immediate attention to the recently released report titled “Reforming Administrative Nomenclature in the Indian Judiciary: Embedding Dignity and Equity in Service Rules”, prepared by the Centre for Research and Planning (CRP), Supreme Court of India.In his communication, the Chief Justice emphasised that several service rules across the judiciary continue to use caste-coded, colonial, and hierarchically loaded titles that are wholly incompatible with the values of the Constitution. Justice Gavai underscored that such terminology, some of which dates back to feudal and colonial regimes, cannot persist in an institution that is constitutionally mandated to uphold equality, dignity, and fraternity.A Call for Urgent ReformJustice Gavai noted that many of these expressions are deeply at odds with the constitutional promise of equality and the vision of dignity and inclusiveness that the Constitution embodies. He urged High Courts to undertake amendments “at the earliest” to their service rules to ensure that the judiciary's internal administrative language reflects constitutional morality and modern institutional ethos.About the ReportThe CRP report presents an exhaustive, nationwide mapping of service rules of the Supreme Court and 25 High Courts. It documents how numerous administrative posts continue to be described using archaic, caste-based, servitude-linked, or colonial-era nomenclature that carry historical baggage and inflict dignitary harm.The report highlights, for instance, that several service rules still retain terms such as “Halalkhor,” “Jamadar,” “Sewak,” “Bhisti,” “Mali,” and “Scavenger”, which are designations tied to caste-based occupations or “polluting” labour, reinforcing structural stigma. Some jurisdictions even continue to list caste names as official designations. The report also identifies other obsolete terms, such as “Basta Bardar/Bundel Lifter,” “Farash,” “Chobdar,” “Cycle Sawar,” and “Masalchi”,whose origins lie in feudal or colonial hierarchies and which no longer carry any functional or dignified relevance in a constitutional democracy.In one striking example, officers performing support or maintenance functions are still categorised under the labels “Last Grade” or “Inferior Staff”, perpetuating a hierarchy of status rather than function .Why Language MattersThe Report argues that administrative nomenclature is not a neutral descriptor but a “discursive mechanism” that reproduces institutional inequality. Drawing from Ambedkarite thought, critical theory, and constitutional jurisprudence, it demonstrates that such terminology reinforces caste hierarchies, normalises social exclusion, violates Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, and 21, and undermines the judiciary's own legitimacy as the custodian of rights.This entrenched lexicon of subordination, the Report notes, constitutes a “grammar of inequality” embedded in official rules that govern courts across the country.A Framework for Modern, Dignified NomenclatureThe report recommends replacing archaic designations with dignified, neutral, and function-based titles. Suggested alternatives include:Peon → Office AssistantCourt Servant → Judicial Support StaffHalalkhor/Scavenger → Sanitation AttendantJamadar → Supervisor (Cleaning/Services)Mali → Horticulture AssistantChowkidar → Security AttendantIt anchors its recommendations in the theory of “resignification”, proposing that we move away from derogatory, caste-linked titles to nomenclature that affirms dignity, recognises professional identity, and aligns institutional vocabulary with constitutional values.A Moment of Institutional Moral ResponsibilityJustice Gavai, in his letter, urged all High Courts to effect necessary “amendments to the service rules at the earliest” so that the judiciary's administrative language reflects its ethical and constitutional commitments.About the CRPThe CRP, Supreme Court of India, is the institutional research unit of the Court. This report is part of CRP's ongoing work to strengthen judicial administration through evidence-based policy frameworks and to deepen the judiciary's alignment with constitutional values. Dr. Anurag Bhaskar, an academician on deputation at the Supreme Court, currently heads the CRP.Click Here To Read Report

Before His Retirement, Chief Justice BR Gavai Urged High Courts To Amend Caste-Coded, Colonial Job Titles

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags