SC clears way for ad-hoc judges to be appointed to HCs
Retired HC judges may be hired to clear huge backlog
New Delhi: Terming pendency of around 57 lakh cases in high courts as “docket explosion”, the Supreme Court Tuesday activated a “dormant” constitutional provision to pave way for appointment of retired high court judges as ad-hoc ones for a period of two to three years to clear backlog and came out with guidelines to regulate appointments.
With a backlog of more than 57 lakh cases pending in the high courts across the country coupled with almost 40% vacancies, the Supreme Court on Tuesday paved the way and framed guidelines for appointment of the retired high court judges as the adhoc judges, with a tenure of two to three years, by taking recourse to Article 224A in the Constitution.
It is for the first time that the top court has taken recourse to Article 224A to clear the way for the appointment ad-hoc judges in the high courts.
In a crucial judgment to help the high courts to clear the backlog of cases, particularly criminal cases but also civil cases as well, which are more than five years old, Chief Justice Sharad A. Bobde heading a bench also comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Surya kant, empowered the High Court Chief Justices to pick up the ad-hoc judges, but only after first recommending the appointment of permanent additional
It is for the first time that the top court has taken recourse to Article 224A to clear the way for the appointment ad-hoc judges in the high courts
judges to fill up the existing vacancies.
It also lays down that the number of ad-hoc judges should be in the range of two to five in a high court.
The top court today said that the ad-hoc judges should be given cases which are more than five years old but the Chief Justice has the discretion to allot them the cases less than five years as well.
The emoluments and allowances of an ad hoc judge shall be at par with a permanent judge of the Court, minus his pension.
To eliminate any possible issue between who will preside over the bench, whether a sitting judge or an ad-hoc judge, the court said that the bench comprising ad-hoc judges will only comprise them.
The top court judgment came on a public interest plea by a Lucknow-based NGO Lok Prahari filed in 2019 seeking the appointment of ad-hoc judges taking recourse to Article 224A of the constitution to address the problem of ever rising backlog of cases.
It gives discretion to the Chief Justices of the high courts to recommend appointment of the retired judges of the same high court or any other high court, laying down the trigger points for exercising that power.
The trigger points include the instances where vacancies are more than 20% of the sanctioned strength of the judges and the cases in a particular category — criminal or civil — are pending for over five years.
More than 10% of the backlog of pending cases is over five years and the rate of the disposal is lower than the institution of the cases in a particular subject matter or generally in the court.
It further says that even if not many old cases are pending, but a situation of mounting arrears is likely to arise if the rate of disposal is consistently lower than the rate of filing over a period of a year or more.