Policy response — Court delays: which course of action is appropriate? Statement: Courts take too long to decide important departmental disputes. Evaluate which action follows logically and is practical.

Introduction / Context:The prompt highlights systemic delays in court adjudication of departmental disputes. We must judge which proposed course of action sensibly follows, considering practicality, institutional roles, and respect for judicial independence.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Courts are slow in deciding important disputes between/within departments.
• Course I: Courts should be ordered to speed up matters.
• Course II: Special powers should be granted to departmental officers to settle disputes concerning their department.
• We assume lawful administrative reforms are acceptable if they do not overreach judicial authority.

Concept / Approach:

• A valid course must be feasible and within appropriate constitutional boundaries.
• Executive “orders” to courts on case speed violate separation of powers; process reform should come from judiciary or legislature.
• Empowering departments with alternative dispute mechanisms can reduce court burden if due process safeguards exist.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:

Final Answer: