Article 224A

Article 224A of the Constitution of India provides a mechanism for appointing retired judges to sit and act as judges of High Courts. This constitutional provision serves as a measure to ensure the uninterrupted functioning of the judiciary in times of temporary vacancies, increased workload, or shortage of judges. It underscores the Indian judiciary’s adaptability and its commitment to maintaining the efficient dispensation of justice.

Historical Background and Constitutional Development

Article 224A was inserted into the Constitution by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963, in response to the increasing pendency of cases in the High Courts and the shortage of regular judges. Before this amendment, there was no explicit provision allowing the reappointment of retired judges to assist High Courts temporarily.
The amendment drew inspiration from practices in other common law jurisdictions where retired judges were occasionally called upon to assist in handling backlogs. The intention behind Article 224A was to provide High Courts with the flexibility to utilise the experience of retired judges without compromising judicial independence or the regular appointment process outlined under Article 217.

Key Provisions of Article 224A

Article 224A contains several essential features governing the appointment and functioning of retired judges in High Courts:

• The Chief Justice of a High Court, with the previous consent of the President of India, may request a retired judge of the same High Court or another High Court to sit and act as a judge of that court.
• Such an appointment is made only with the consent of the retired judge, who cannot be compelled to accept the position.
• A retired judge serving under Article 224A enjoys the same powers, jurisdiction, and privileges as a permanent judge of the High Court.
• They are entitled to such allowances as determined by the President, though they are not treated as permanent judges for salary or service conditions.
• The provision is purely temporary and honorary in nature and does not alter the status of the retired judge as a former member of the judiciary.

The use of this article is generally reserved for situations where the High Court faces an exceptional increase in workload, or when regular judicial appointments are delayed due to procedural reasons.

Constitutional and Administrative Framework

The appointment under Article 224A is distinct from that of additional or acting judges appointed under Article 224. While Article 224 deals with serving judges appointed temporarily to handle excess workload, Article 224A pertains specifically to retired judges, providing an additional reservoir of judicial expertise.
The administrative process involves the following stages:

1. The Chief Justice of the High Court identifies the need for additional judicial support.
2. A proposal is submitted to the President of India through the Ministry of Law and Justice.
3. Upon receiving the President’s approval, and after obtaining the retired judge’s consent, a formal notification of appointment is issued.

This system maintains the balance between judicial autonomy and executive involvement, ensuring that such appointments are made transparently and only when genuinely required.

Significance and Objectives

The inclusion of Article 224A serves several constitutional and practical purposes:

• Ensuring judicial efficiency: It provides High Courts with additional judicial strength to manage temporary surges in workload.
• Utilising judicial experience: It enables the judiciary to benefit from the expertise and wisdom of experienced retired judges.
• Maintaining continuity: Retired judges can step in immediately, ensuring that the judicial process is not delayed due to vacancies.
• Safeguarding independence: Since appointments are made with the judge’s consent and the President’s approval, the process respects the autonomy and dignity of retired judges.

In essence, Article 224A reflects a flexible judicial mechanism that upholds both the efficiency and independence of the judiciary.

Case Law and Judicial Developments

As of October 2023, there have been no landmark Supreme Court judgments directly interpreting Article 224A. However, several judicial pronouncements have emphasised the broader principles governing judicial appointments and the use of retired judges.
In cases like Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015), which invalidated the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) and restored the Collegium system, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the importance of judicial independence in all forms of judicial appointments, including temporary and ad hoc arrangements.
Although Article 224A was not directly addressed in that case, the ruling implicitly supports the view that executive discretion in such appointments must remain minimal, with judicial consultation serving as the guiding principle.

Practical Applications and Current Use

In practice, Article 224A has been invoked sparingly, mainly during periods when the High Courts faced significant case backlogs or delays in the appointment of new judges. Retired judges who are recalled under this provision often preside over specific categories of cases, such as civil appeals, writ petitions, or long-pending criminal matters, to expedite disposal.
Recent instances have seen High Courts such as those in Madras, Kerala, and Allahabad invoking Article 224A to appoint retired judges temporarily. These appointments have proved effective in reducing arrears and maintaining continuity in adjudication during transitional phases.

Limitations and Challenges

While Article 224A provides valuable flexibility, certain limitations are inherent to its operation:

• The consent of the retired judge is mandatory; the Constitution explicitly prohibits compulsion.
• Appointments under this article are temporary and non-permanent in nature.
• Retired judges appointed under Article 224A are not members of the regular High Court strength and thus do not affect the sanctioned number of judges.
• Over-reliance on retired judges could raise concerns regarding judicial independence, particularly if the appointments become frequent or politically influenced.

Furthermore, practical issues such as the availability of qualified retired judges, budgetary allocations for allowances, and administrative delays in securing presidential consent can sometimes limit the efficacy of this provision.

Relevance in Contemporary Judicial Administration

In the context of judicial backlog and case pendency, Article 224A remains a vital constitutional tool. Its proper utilisation can substantially contribute to enhancing the productivity of High Courts. As India’s legal system continues to evolve, the role of retired judges may become increasingly significant in ensuring timely justice delivery.
By allowing experienced judges to return temporarily to the bench, Article 224A bridges the gap between judicial expertise and institutional need, maintaining the delicate balance between efficiency, independence, and constitutional propriety.