Bar Opposes SC Collegium's Ad Hoc Judge Proposal for Allahabad HC

Allahabad High Court Bar objects to ad hoc judge appointments by SC Collegium.

Photo by Ankit Sharma

The High Court Bar Association (HCBA), Allahabad, opposes the Supreme Court Collegium's proposal to appoint five retired judges to the Allahabad High Court under Article 224-A of the Constitution. The HCBA questions the constitutional validity, arguing that Article 224-A requires initiation by the High Court Chief Justice with the President's consent.

The Bar contends the appointments lack proper selection and consultation with stakeholders. The SC Collegium approved the proposal to appoint five retired judges as ad hoc judges for two years.

Key Facts

The High Court Bar Association (HCBA), Allahabad, opposes the Supreme Court Collegium's proposal.

The proposal involves appointing five retired judges to the Allahabad High Court under Article 224-A.

The HCBA questions the constitutional validity of the move.

The HCBA argues that Article 224-A requires initiation by the High Court Chief Justice with the President's consent.

The Bar contends the appointments lack proper selection and consultation with stakeholders.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Polity and Governance - Appointment of Judges, Constitutional Provisions

Connects to the syllabus topics of Judiciary, Constitution, and Governance

Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical questions on judicial appointments

Visual Insights

Allahabad High Court Location

Shows the location of Allahabad High Court, where the ad-hoc judge proposal is being debated.

Loading interactive map...

📍Uttar Pradesh

More Information

Background

The appointment of ad hoc judges in High Courts has a historical context rooted in addressing the issue of case backlogs and ensuring the efficient functioning of the judiciary. The provision for ad hoc judges is enshrined in Article 224A of the Constitution, which allows for the appointment of retired judges to High Courts for a temporary period. Over time, the interpretation and application of Article 224A have been subject to judicial scrutiny and debate. The Supreme Court has played a significant role in clarifying the scope and limitations of this provision, emphasizing the need for exceptional circumstances and adherence to procedural safeguards. The use of ad hoc judges is intended to be a temporary measure, not a substitute for regular judicial appointments. The constitutional framework governing the appointment of ad hoc judges involves a collaborative process between the High Court Chief Justice and the President of India. The Chief Justice initiates the proposal, and the President's consent is required for the appointment to be finalized. This process ensures a balance between the judiciary's need for flexibility and the executive's oversight in judicial appointments. The Collegium System also plays a role in these appointments.

Latest Developments

Recently, the Supreme Court Collegium's proposal to appoint ad hoc judges to the Allahabad High Court has faced opposition from the High Court Bar Association (HCBA). This opposition highlights the ongoing debates surrounding the appointment process and the constitutional validity of such appointments. The HCBA's concerns reflect broader issues related to judicial independence and the selection of judges. The debate also involves different stakeholder perspectives, including those of the judiciary, the bar association, and the government. Each stakeholder may have varying opinions on the necessity, procedure, and impact of appointing ad hoc judges. These differing perspectives underscore the complexities of judicial appointments and the need for consensus-building. Looking ahead, the resolution of this issue will likely involve further deliberations and clarifications from the Supreme Court and the government. The outcome could set a precedent for future appointments of ad hoc judges in High Courts across the country. It also raises questions about the long-term solutions to address the issue of judicial vacancies and case backlogs. The role of the Department of Justice is also crucial in this process.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding Article 224A of the Constitution of India: 1. It provides for the appointment of retired judges to High Courts. 2. The proposal for such appointments must be initiated by the High Court Chief Justice with the President's consent. 3. These appointments are intended as a permanent solution to address judicial vacancies. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: A

Statement 1 is CORRECT: Article 224A of the Constitution indeed allows for the appointment of retired judges to High Courts. Statement 2 is CORRECT: The proposal for such appointments must be initiated by the High Court Chief Justice, with the President's consent required for the appointment. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: These appointments are intended as a temporary measure to address case backlogs, not as a permanent solution to judicial vacancies. Regular judicial appointments are the long-term solution.

2. The High Court Bar Association (HCBA), Allahabad, has opposed the Supreme Court Collegium's proposal based on which of the following arguments? 1. The appointments lack proper selection criteria. 2. There was no consultation with stakeholders. 3. Article 224-A requires initiation by the High Court Chief Justice with the President's consent. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: D

All three statements are correct. The HCBA has questioned the constitutional validity, arguing that Article 224-A requires initiation by the High Court Chief Justice with the President's consent. The Bar contends the appointments lack proper selection and consultation with stakeholders.

3. Which of the following statements accurately describes the role of the Collegium System in India?

A.It is a body established by an Act of Parliament to oversee judicial appointments.
B.It is a system evolved through judgments of the Supreme Court to appoint and transfer judges.
C.It is an advisory body to the Law Ministry on matters of judicial reforms.
D.It is responsible for the administrative functions of the Supreme Court and High Courts.

Show Answer

Answer: B

The Collegium System is a system that has evolved through judgments of the Supreme Court to appoint and transfer judges. It is not established by an Act of Parliament, nor is it merely an advisory body. It is also not responsible for administrative functions of the courts.