Question 1

Ad-hoc judges appointed to High Courts become regular, permanent members of the court for their tenure.

Accepted Answer

While they exercise the jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a regular judge, Article 224A explicitly states they shall not be deemed to be a judge of that High Court. It is a temporary, stop-gap arrangement.

Question 2

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) directly appoints ad-hoc judges for any High Court in the country.

Accepted Answer

Under Article 224A, it is the Chief Justice of the respective High Court who initiates the request, which must then be approved by the President of India.

Question 3

Consider the following statements regarding the appointment of ad-hoc judges in High Courts:
1. Article 224A was inserted into the Constitution of India by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.
2. According to the January 2025 Supreme Court directives, the number of ad-hoc judges must not exceed 10 percent of a High Court's sanctioned strength.
3. The prior consent of the Governor of the concerned state is constitutionally required before a retired judge can sit as an ad-hoc judge.

How many of the above statements are correct?

Accepted Answer

(a) Only one — Statement 1 is incorrect; Article 224A was reintroduced by the 15th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1963 (not the 42nd). Statement 2 is correct as per the January 30, 2025 Supreme Court judgment. Statement 3 is incorrect because Article 224A strictly requires the prior consent of the President of India, not the Governor, along with the consent of the retired judge. Thus, only one statement is correct.

Question 4

Match List I (Constitutional Provisions / Cases) with List II (Related Subject Matter):

List I
A. Article 224A
B. Article 128
C. Article 224
D. Lok Prahari Case (2021)

List II
1. Attendance of retired judges at Supreme Court sittings
2. Appointment of additional and acting judges in High Courts
3. Appointment of retired judges at High Court sittings
4. Guidelines for invoking dormant provisions for ad-hoc judges

Select the correct answer code:

Accepted Answer

(a) A-3, B-1, C-2, D-4 — Article 224A deals with requesting retired judges to sit in High Courts (A-3). Article 128 deals with retired judges sitting in the Supreme Court (B-1). Article 224 provides for the appointment of Additional and Acting judges in High Courts (C-2). The Lok Prahari v. Union of India (2021) judgment is the landmark case where the SC originally laid down guidelines to activate the dormant Article 224A (D-4).

Question 5

Assertion (A): In January 2025, the Supreme Court waived the condition that ad-hoc judges under Article 224A can only be appointed if a High Court's vacancies exceed 20 percent of its sanctioned strength.
Reason (R): High Courts face an acute backlog of pending criminal appeals that require immediate resolution, necessitating judicial reinforcement regardless of current vacancy rates.

Select the correct answer:

Accepted Answer

(a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A. — The Assertion is true; the 3-judge bench in January 2025 explicitly relaxed the 2021 'Lok Prahari' guidelines which mandated a 20 percent vacancy trigger. The Reason is also true and correctly explains the Assertion: the waiver was specifically granted to address the acute pendency of criminal cases (nearly 2 million in High Courts) by allowing ad-hoc judges to sit in criminal benches, even if the court is operating near its full sanctioned strength.

SC Issues Directives on Appointment of Ad-hoc Judges

ISRO Launches ESA's Proba-3 Solar Observation Mission