Viability of Ad-Hoc Appointments:
- The Supreme Court’s endorsement of ad-hoc judges aims to address the 62 lakh case backlog in High Courts as of January 2025.
- Previous attempts at ad-hoc appointments have been minimal, but renewed hope exists with recent judicial intervention.
- High judicial vacancies (367 out of 1,122) highlight the need for immediate action to reduce the backlog.
Relevance : GS 2(Indian Judiciary)
Impact on Regular Judicial Appointment Process:
- India has lacked a systematic approach to address judicial delays for 75 years, with concerns over the handling of regular judicial appointments.
- Ad-hoc appointments do not interfere with the regular appointment process and provide timely relief, especially for criminal cases.
Reforming the Ad-Hoc Appointment Process:
- Simplifying the appointment process is key: The Chief Justice of High Courts should directly recommend candidates to the Supreme Court collegium.
- Avoid unnecessary procedures like intelligence clearances to speed up the appointment process and avoid discouraging candidates.
Impact on Judicial Careers and Seniority:
- Ad-hoc judges serve for 2-3 years and do not compete with sitting judges, meaning they do not affect the seniority of current judges.
- Article 224A ensures that ad-hoc judges cannot be elevated, protecting the promotion prospects of regular judges.
Strain on Judicial Infrastructure:
- The government must ensure resources like stenographers and law researchers for ad-hoc judges to focus on judicial duties.
- High Courts already have the capacity to accommodate additional courtrooms, and logistical challenges can be addressed by reassigning staff.
Attracting Judges to Return to the Bench:
- Financial incentives and privileges are necessary to attract retired judges, as alternatives like arbitration and independent practice are more lucrative.
- The restriction on practicing in the same High Court after serving as an ad-hoc judge may discourage some candidates.
Judicial Independence Concerns:
- Personal connections with the legal community do not inherently compromise judicial independence.
- Careful selection of candidates with integrity and technical expertise is crucial to maintaining judicial independence.
Conclusion:
- Ad-hoc appointments can offer immediate relief for reducing case backlogs, particularly in criminal appeals, without disrupting the regular judicial system.
- The effectiveness of this measure depends on simplifying the appointment process, ensuring government cooperation, and providing necessary logistical support.
Additional notes:
Ad-Hoc Judges in Indian Polity
- Definition: Ad-hoc judges are temporary appointments made to handle the mounting backlog of cases in the judiciary. They are typically retired judges appointed for a limited term to assist in case adjudication.
- Constitutional Provision: Article 224A of the Indian Constitution allows the appointment of ad-hoc judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts to address judicial pendency.
- Recent Developments: In January 2025, the Supreme Court authorized High Courts to appoint retired judges on an ad-hoc basis to hear criminal appeals, working alongside sitting judges.
- Challenges:
- The process requires presidential approval, making government cooperation essential.
- Despite constitutional provisions, the practice has been limited in scope, with only a few ad-hoc appointments in the past.
- Benefits:
- Provides immediate relief in reducing case backlogs, especially in criminal cases.
- Does not affect the seniority or career progression of sitting judges.
- Concerns:
- The appointment process has been cumbersome, with calls for simplification to speed up the process.
- Judicial independence must be maintained by ensuring only candidates of impeccable integrity are appointed.
