Supreme Court Proposes Ad Hoc Judges for Backlog Relief

January 24, 2025

On January 21, 2025, the Supreme Court of India suggested the temporary appointment of retired judges to alleviate the backlog of pending criminal cases in various High Courts. This proposal is rooted in Article 224A of the Constitution of India, which permits such appointments under specific conditions. This article has seldom been utilised, but its invocation is crucial in addressing the judicial backlog.

About Article 224A

Article 224A allows the Chief Justice of a High Court to request retired judges to serve temporarily.
This requires the consent of both the retired judge and the President of India.
Appointed judges receive allowances as decided by the President but are not classified as regular judges.

Appointment Procedure

The procedure for appointing ad hoc judges is outlined in the 1998 Memorandum of Procedure (MOP). Following a retired judge’s consent, the Chief Justice must recommend the appointment to the state’s Chief Minister, who then forwards it to the Union Law Minister. The Minister consults the Chief Justice of India before passing the recommendation to the Prime Minister, who advises the President on approval.

Supreme Court Ruling on Recommendations

In a 2021 ruling, the Supreme Court emphasised that recommendations for appointing ad hoc judges must go through the Supreme Court’s collegium, which includes the Chief Justice and two senior judges. This ruling aims to ensure proper oversight and adherence to judicial processes.

Criteria for Ad Hoc Appointments

The Supreme Court has established specific conditions for initiating the appointment of ad hoc judges.
These include situations where regular appointment recommendations have not been made for at least 20% of the vacancies.
The court also set a “Trigger Point” for appointments, requiring that High Courts have over 20% vacancies and that more than 10% of cases have been pending for over five years.

Historical Context of Ad Hoc Judges

Historically, ad hoc judges have been appointed infrequently. The Supreme Court identified only three instances since the provision’s inception – Justice Suraj Bhan in 1972, Justice P. Venugopal in 1982, and Justice O P Srivastava in 2007. This rarity marks the underutilisation of Article 224A.

Recommendations for Future Appointments

The Supreme Court has recommended that Chief Justices create a panel of retired judges for potential ad hoc appointments. These judges should typically serve for 2-3 years, with each High Court appointing two to five ad hoc judges. Regular reviews of these appointments are advised to ensure their effectiveness.

Addressing Judicial Vacancies

The Supreme Court’s suggestions come amidst vacancy crisis, with nearly 40% of High Court positions unfilled. Previous Law Commission reports have advocated for the use of retired judges to mitigate this issue. The current proposals aim to balance the need for immediate judicial relief with the importance of regular appointments.

« Previous Post Next Post »