Actual Article
Article 127: Appointment of ad hoc Judges
- Appointment of Ad Hoc Judges:
- If at any time there is a lack of quorum of the Judges of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India may, with the previous consent of the President, request in writing the attendance at the sittings of the Court as an ad hoc Judge, of a Judge of a High Court duly qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court, to act as an ad hoc Judge of the Supreme Court for such period as may be necessary.
- Qualifications and Consent:
- It shall be the duty of the Judge so requested to attend the sittings of the Supreme Court, in priority to other duties of his office, and while so attending, he shall have all the jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a Judge of the Supreme Court.
- Compensation:
- The President may, by order, fix the allowances to be paid to the ad hoc Judge while attending the sittings of the Supreme Court.
UPSC Notes for Article 127
Explanation:
- Appointment of Ad Hoc Judges:
- The Chief Justice of India (CJI) can request a High Court judge to serve as an ad hoc judge in the Supreme Court when there is a lack of quorum.
- The request requires the previous consent of the President.
- Qualifications and Consent:
- The requested judge must be qualified to be a Supreme Court judge.
- The requested judge must prioritize attending the Supreme Court over other duties and will have the same powers and privileges as a Supreme Court judge during this period.
- Compensation:
- The President has the authority to fix allowances for the ad hoc judge while they serve in the Supreme Court.
Key Points:
- Ensuring Quorum: Helps maintain the required number of judges in the Supreme Court to ensure that judicial proceedings are not delayed due to a lack of quorum.
- Temporary Solution: Provides a temporary solution to address short-term shortages of judges in the Supreme Court.
- Executive and Judicial Coordination: Requires coordination between the judiciary (CJI) and the executive (President) to appoint ad hoc judges.
Important Cases and Commissions Related to Article 127
Cases:
- Union of India vs. Sankalchand Himmatlal Sheth (1977): Addressed the importance of maintaining judicial efficiency and independence, indirectly supporting the provisions of Article 127.
- Krishna Swami vs. Union of India (1992): Emphasized the need for maintaining the quorum of judges to ensure the smooth functioning of the judiciary.
Commissions:
- Second Administrative Reforms Commission: Suggested measures to enhance judicial efficiency and address issues related to the shortage of judges.
- National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) (2002): Recommended reforms to ensure the timely appointment of judges and address the backlog of cases in the judiciary.
Previous Year Prelims Questions Related to Article 127
- (UPSC Prelims 2016) Under Article 127, the Chief Justice of India can request the attendance of an ad hoc Judge of the Supreme Court with the previous consent of:
- A. The Prime Minister
- B. The Attorney General
- C. The President
- D. The Chief Justice of the concerned High Court Correct Answer: C. The President
- (UPSC Prelims 2018) An ad hoc Judge appointed under Article 127 has the same powers and privileges as:
- A. A Judge of the High Court
- B. A Judge of the Supreme Court
- C. The Chief Justice of India
- D. The Attorney General Correct Answer: B. A Judge of the Supreme Court
Previous Year Mains Questions Related to Article 127
- Mains 2016: “Discuss the significance of Article 127 in maintaining the quorum of the Supreme Court. How does the appointment of ad hoc judges help in ensuring the smooth functioning of the judiciary?”
- Mains 2019: “Analyze the role of the Chief Justice of India and the President in the appointment of ad hoc judges under Article 127. How does this provision ensure judicial efficiency and address the shortage of judges?”
Additional Insights:
- Judicial Efficiency: Article 127 ensures that the Supreme Court can function efficiently even when there is a temporary shortage of judges, maintaining the continuity of judicial proceedings.
- Flexibility in Judicial Administration: The provision allows for flexibility in judicial administration by enabling temporary appointments to address immediate needs without the lengthy process of permanent appointments.
- Coordination for Judicial Functioning: The requirement for the President’s consent emphasizes the need for coordination between the judiciary and the executive, ensuring that appointments are made judiciously and with due consideration.
Understanding Article 127 is crucial for UPSC aspirants as it outlines the provisions for appointing ad hoc judges to the Supreme Court, ensuring the maintenance of judicial efficiency and continuity. This knowledge is essential for both preliminary and main examinations, offering a comprehensive understanding of the constitutional provisions that support the effective administration of the judiciary within India’s legal framework.