Article 146

Article 146 of the Constitution of India lays down the framework for the appointment, service conditions, and administrative expenses of the officers and servants of the Supreme Court. This provision ensures that the highest court of the land functions efficiently, independently, and without undue interference from the executive or legislature. By entrusting administrative control primarily to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and securing financial autonomy through the Consolidated Fund of India, Article 146 reinforces the constitutional principle of judicial independence.

Constitutional Text

The Article provides as follows:

(1) Appointments of officers and servants of the Supreme Court shall be made by the Chief Justice of India or such other Judge or officer of the Court as he may direct:Provided that the President may by rule require that in such cases as may be specified in the rule, no person not already attached to the Court shall be appointed to any office connected with the Court, save after consultation with the Union Public Service Commission.

(2) Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, the conditions of service of officers and servants of the Supreme Court shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made by the Chief Justice of India or by some other Judge or officer of the Court authorised by the Chief Justice of India to make rules for the purpose:Provided that the rules made under this clause shall, so far as they relate to salaries, allowances, leave, or pensions, require the approval of the President.

(3) The administrative expenses of the Supreme Court, including all salaries, allowances, and pensions payable to or in respect of the officers and servants of the Court, shall be charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India, and any fees or other moneys taken by the Court shall form part of that Fund.

Purpose and Objective

The primary purpose of Article 146 is to secure the independence of the Supreme Court’s administration by placing appointments, service conditions, and expenditure under judicial supervision rather than executive control. The Article ensures that:

• The Chief Justice of India has autonomy over appointments and internal administration.
• Parliamentary legislation may regulate service conditions, but without undermining judicial independence.
• The financial requirements of the Supreme Court are met directly through the Consolidated Fund of India, preventing budgetary control by the executive.

This arrangement guarantees both administrative independence and financial security, two essential components of a free judiciary.

Key Provisions and Their Interpretation

1. Appointment of Officers and Servants

• The Chief Justice of India is vested with the authority to make appointments to all posts within the Supreme Court.
• The CJI may delegate this power to another Judge or authorised officer of the Court.
• The President, however, may frame rules requiring that certain appointments, particularly from outside the Court’s existing staff, must be made in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
• This provision ensures a balance between autonomy and meritocracy, allowing for external oversight without compromising the Court’s internal control.

2. Conditions of Service

• The service conditions of Supreme Court officers and servants are governed by rules framed by the Chief Justice of India, subject to any law made by Parliament.
• Rules related to salaries, allowances, leave, or pensions require the President’s approval, ensuring accountability and uniformity in public service norms.
• This dual structure—judicial rule-making subject to limited executive oversight—maintains equilibrium between judicial autonomy and administrative discipline.

3. Administrative Expenses and Financial Autonomy

• All administrative expenses of the Supreme Court, including salaries, allowances, and pensions, are charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India.
• This means such expenditures do not require annual parliamentary approval, thereby safeguarding the financial independence of the judiciary.
• Any court fees, fines, or other revenues collected by the Supreme Court are also credited to the Consolidated Fund, ensuring transparency and accountability.

This financial arrangement ensures that the Supreme Court remains free from political or budgetary pressure while performing its constitutional duties.

Relationship with Other Constitutional Provisions

• Article 124: Establishes the Supreme Court and outlines its composition.
• Article 125: Deals with the salaries and allowances of the Judges of the Supreme Court.
• Article 146: Complements these provisions by addressing the administrative and financial aspects necessary for the Court’s effective functioning.
• Article 229: Provides similar provisions for the High Courts, granting comparable administrative and financial autonomy to the Chief Justices of the High Courts.

Together, these Articles ensure that the judiciary operates as an independent pillar of democracy, free from external influence in both adjudicatory and administrative domains.

Case Laws and Judicial Interpretation

Although Article 146 has not been the subject of extensive litigation, several judgments have touched upon its principles, particularly in relation to judicial independence and administrative control:

• Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1993):While primarily concerning the appointment of Judges, the judgment emphasised the need for judicial primacy in appointments, a principle that resonates with the autonomy granted under Article 146.
• State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (2010):The Court reiterated that the judiciary’s independence extends to its administrative and financial domains, thereby affirming the constitutional intent behind Articles 146 and 229.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975):The case underscored the supremacy of constitutional provisions in maintaining judicial integrity, indirectly reinforcing the importance of Article 146 in upholding institutional independence.

Through such rulings, the judiciary has recognised that its independence is not limited to adjudication but also includes control over its internal governance.

Significance of Financial Provisions

By charging the Supreme Court’s administrative expenses to the Consolidated Fund of India, Article 146 ensures:

• Financial Security: The Court’s budget is not subject to executive approval, preserving its functional autonomy.
• Continuity of Operations: Essential services and salaries cannot be disrupted due to financial or political constraints.
• Constitutional Priority: Judicial expenditures are treated as obligatory state expenses, similar to those for the President and Parliament.

This constitutional arrangement reflects the principle that judicial independence requires financial independence.

Administrative Significance

1. Autonomy of the Chief Justice of India:The CJI’s authority over appointments, administration, and rule-making ensures efficient management and internal discipline within the judiciary.
2. Balance Between Independence and Accountability:The requirement of presidential approval for financial and service-related matters introduces a measure of oversight, preventing potential misuse of administrative discretion.
3. Professional and Transparent Recruitment:Consultation with the UPSC for specific appointments upholds merit-based recruitment and safeguards against nepotism or bias.
4. Institutional Continuity:The Article ensures the existence of a permanent, professionally managed administrative structure supporting the Supreme Court’s constitutional role.

Importance in the Constitutional Scheme

• Guarantee of Judicial Independence:By granting administrative and financial autonomy, Article 146 prevents undue executive influence over the judiciary.
• Efficient Court Administration:It ensures that the Supreme Court operates smoothly through a competent administrative staff functioning under judicial supervision.
• Strengthening the Rule of Law:Financial independence and control over appointments contribute to impartial justice, free from political or bureaucratic constraints.
• Model for High Courts:Article 146 serves as a prototype for Article 229, establishing similar provisions for the independence of High Courts.

Contemporary Relevance

In today’s complex judicial ecosystem, the administrative and financial autonomy provided by Article 146 remains crucial. The Supreme Court’s independence depends not only on the impartiality of Judges but also on the competence, neutrality, and integrity of its administrative machinery.
The provision enables the judiciary to modernise its processes, adopt technology-driven case management systems, and maintain efficient coordination among registries and staff—all without excessive executive interference.

Constitutional Significance

Article 146 embodies the principle that the judiciary’s independence is comprehensive—extending beyond decision-making to encompass its internal administration and financial management. By vesting administrative control in the Chief Justice of India and securing financial independence through the Consolidated Fund, it ensures that the Supreme Court remains insulated from political pressures.