Supreme Court proposes 'ad-hoc' appointment of retired judges

Why in the NEWS?

• Supreme Court suggests ad-hoc appointment of retired judges to clear pending criminal cases.

Key Points:

• The court has pointed to the possibility of appointing retired judges on a temporary basis, so that the cases can be disposed of quickly.
• This step has been taken to deal with the increasing number of pending cases in the High Courts.
• This suggestion is a step towards reducing the workload in the courts and speedy disposal of cases.  

What will you read next in this topic?

1. Appointment of Ad-hoc Judges in India:
2. Constitutional Basis: Article 224A
3. Process of Appointment:
4. When are ad hoc judges appointed?
5. Role and Responsibilities of Ad Hoc Judges:
6. Concerns and criticisms:
7. Previous Instances of Appointment of Ad-hoc Judges:
8. Recent developments: Supreme Court suggests appointment of ad hoc judges.
9. Conclusion and future outlook:

Appointment of Ad-hoc Judges in India

• The appointment of ad-hoc judges in India is governed by Article 224A of the Indian Constitution.
• This provision allows the appointment of retired judges to temporarily fill judicial vacancies in high courts, especially when there is a shortage of sitting judges to handle the growing backlog of cases.

Constitutional Basis: Article 224A

• Article 224A of the Indian Constitution allows the Chief Justice of a High Court to request the President of India to appoint a retired judge from that High Court or any other High Court to act temporarily as a judge in that High Court.
• The retired judge, after being appointed, will have all the powers, jurisdiction and privileges of a sitting judge of the High Court.
• These appointments are temporary and are based on the need to address the shortage of judges or the increase in the number of pending cases.

Process of Appointment

• Approval by the President: The Chief Justice of the High Court, after obtaining the consent of the President, requests for the appointment of a retired judge. This is done after consultation with the President of India.
• No fixed tenure: There is no fixed tenure for these ad hoc appointments, as they are made based on the specific need to address a shortage of judges or expedite the disposal of cases.
• Powers of appointment: A retired judge appointed as an ad hoc judge enjoys the same powers, privileges and jurisdiction as a regular sitting judge, although his role is temporary.

When are ad hoc judges appointed?

• Judicial vacancies: Ad hoc judges are appointed when there are judicial vacancies in the High Court. In many cases, these vacancies arise due to retirements, promotions or no timely appointments to vacant positions.
• Pending cases: When there is a significant backlog of cases, the High Court may request the appointment of ad hoc judges to help reduce the pending caseload. This is particularly relevant in cases where the regular appointment process has been slow or delayed.
• Urgency: Ad hoc judges may be appointed when the backlog of cases is very high and requires immediate attention. This ensures that judicial delays are minimized.

Role and Responsibilities of Ad Hoc Judges

• Same Powers: Once appointed, ad hoc judges perform the same duties as regular judges, presiding over cases and delivering judgments. 
  • They have the same authority to hear and dispose of cases as permanent judges.
• Temporary Appointments: These appointments are usually temporary, often lasting from a few months to a year, depending on the need.
• Special Areas: In some cases, ad hoc judges may be appointed to particular areas where they already have experience or expertise. 
  • For example, a retired judge with experience in handling complex commercial disputes may be appointed to deal with such cases.

Concerns and criticisms

• Limited use: Despite having provisions under the Constitution, ad hoc appointments have been little used in India, and the process is considered inefficient.
  • Many argue that it is a short-term solution to the systemic problem of judicial vacancies and delayed appointments.
• Quality concerns: There are concerns that ad hoc judges may not always be as effective as regular judges due to their short-term nature, lack of permanent institutional integration, and lack of interest in the long-term functioning of the judiciary.
• Lack of clear guidelines: The criteria for selecting ad hoc judges are not always clear, which can lead to inconsistencies in appointments.
  • The non-regular nature of these appointments can also affect the long-term judicial process, especially with regard to accountability and training.

Previous Instances of Appointment of Ad-hoc Judges:

• Historically, the use of ad-hoc judges in India has been very low. However, in some cases, the judiciary has resorted to such appointments to handle specific pending cases.

Notable appointments:

• In 1972, a retired judge was appointed to hear election petitions in the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
• In 1982, retired judge Justice P. Venugopal was appointed to the Madras High Court.
• In 2007, retired Justice O.P. Srivastava was appointed to hear the Ayodhya land dispute case in the Allahabad High Court.

Recent developments: Supreme Court suggests appointment of ad hoc judges.

• Supreme Court Suggestions: The Supreme Court has recently emphasized the use of ad-hoc appointments in high courts, especially in view of the growing pendency of cases and the crisis of vacancies. 
  • It suggested that retired judges should be appointed on an ad hoc basis to help clear pending cases in the High Courts, especially when regular judicial appointments are not made in a timely manner.
  • The Court also recommended that the Chief Justice of the High Court maintain a panel of retired judges who can be appointed immediately if required.

Conclusion and future outlook:

• The appointment of ad hoc judges is an important tool to address judicial vacancies and pendency in the courts of India. 
• Though this provision is part of the Constitution, its implementation has been limited and there is a growing need to make better use of this provision to ensure timely justice.
• Systemic reform in judicial appointments is necessary to reduce reliance on ad hoc appointments. 
• However, until regular appointments are made in a timely manner, ad hoc appointments will continue to be an essential mechanism to ensure the efficient functioning of the judiciary.