Supreme Court expresses its intention to lay down guidelines for appointment of ad-hoc judges under Article 224A of the Constitution

The Supreme Court of India, recently while dealing with a PIL filed by an NGO named Lok Prahar, expressed its intentions to lay down guidelines for the appointment of ad-hoc judges in High Courts under Article 224A of the Constitution to tackle the problem of mounting case arrears. The bench comprising of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, and Surya Kant, discussed various aspects of the appointment.

The key issues listed were the level of pendency which would trigger such appointment, if such pendency should be determined branch-wise or generally, and the appointment process, tenure, and salary of such ad-hoc judges.

CJI Bobde, requesting for assistance of senior advocates, representing various High Courts, stated that a principle linked to pendency must be determined, a benchmark of pendency to be set after which the Chief Justices would be alerted.

Following such caution, he would appoint ad-hoc judges, but on this issue, CJI Bobde went onto emphasize on scientific determination of the number and tenure of such appointments to defeat arbitrariness. Justice SK Kaul adding to it stated that such judges would only deal with old cases, and the new cases would continue to be heard by regular judges.

The usage of the word "ad hoc" was also discussed in the hearing as these judges are not appointees under Article 224A of the Indian Constitution, they are just requestees.

Senior Advocate R Basant suggested that since, remedy should not be worse than the malady, vacancy rather than pendency should be considered as a factor to appoint ad-hoc judges.

When it came to the issue of allowances for ad hoc judges, it was suggested by Senior Advocate Ravindra Srivastava the allowances should take into account the pension already being drawn by the ex-judges. He explained that under Article 224A since the judge is just deemed to be a judge, there is no concept of salary, he will be paid what the President determines as the allowances.

The bench asked the Senior Advocates representing different High Courts to submit a joint suggestion on the issues discussed during the hearing by April 14.