Indian High Courts list far more matters each day than a bench can hear. A Delhi High Court judge's advance list carries about fifty matters against roughly four and a half hours of argument time. Because listing is by item number alone, no advocate, litigant or judge knows when a particular matter will be reached. The consequences compound: advocates block out whole days for fifteen-minute hearings; adjournment requests arrive the evening before or by mentioning in the morning, wasting the preparation of the Bench and the other side; matters listed for final arguments are not reached, or are heard in fragments across months, destroying continuity; and the next date is set far out because every list is already full. A large share of those adjournments are avoidable. One of the major reason is usually clash, where a counsel wanted before two benches at the same hour, which nobody can prevent because nobody knows in advance who is appearing where.
Court Scheduler is a decision-support system for the Court's Registry. Three days before a hearing it asks every party on record four questions: what is this matter actually listed for; if it is ready to be argued, how long will you need; which counsel will argue it; and if you need more time, which dates over the next two months genuinely suit you. A constraint engine then builds each day's list from those answers, within the bench's real sitting capacity, and publishes not only a date for each matter but an estimated window of when it will be called. Matters not yet ready for argument never consume argument time and they go to a short-matters block, with the procedural directions drafted in advance from the parties' own proposed timelines.
Throughout, the system proposes and a person decides.