New Delhi, Feb 4 (UNI) The Supreme Court collegium has (on Tuesday) invoked Article 224A of the Constitution to re-appoint five retired judges of the Allahabad High Court as ad-hoc judges for a period of two years, in a move aimed at addressing the heavy pendency of criminal cases.
The collegium comprising Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, Justices Vikram Nath and Justice J.K. Maheshwari, cleared the names of Justices Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Mohd. Aslam, Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi, Renu Agarwal, and Jyotsna Sharma for appointment as ad-hoc judges of the Allahabad High Court.
With these appointments, the working strength of the Allahabad High Court will rise to 115 judges, though it remains below the sanctioned strength of 160.
The addition is expected to ease the backlog, particularly in the court’s criminal jurisdiction.
Appointments under Article 224A are rare, despite the constitutional provision allowing the Chief Justice of a High Court, with the prior consent of the President, to appoint retired judges as ad-hoc judges to deal with high pendency or vacancy levels.
The Supreme Court has facilitated such appointments only three times: Justice Suraj Bhan to the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 1972, Justice P. Venugopal to the Madras High Court in 1982, and Justice O.P. Srivastava to the Allahabad High Court in 2007.
In a 2021 judgment, the Supreme Court revived what it described as a “dormant” constitutional provision to tackle massive pendency in High Courts.
Sources indicated that CJI Surya Kant initiated the present process after coming across reports that High Courts were not complying with the top court’s directions on the use of Article 224A.
Subsequently, letters were sent to all High Court Chief Justices seeking recommendations for ad-hoc judges.
While proposals from three High Courts have been received so far, the Allahabad High Court’s recommendation has been approved.
The collegium is expected to meet again to consider the remaining proposals, with more High Courts in the process of sending their suggestions.
In December last year, a bench led by CJI Surya Kant had clarified the 2021 ruling and granted High Court Chief Justices greater flexibility in constituting benches involving ad-hoc judges.
The clarification held that High Court Chief Justices may constitute division benches of two ad-hoc judges or a combination of one sitting judge and one ad-hoc judge, and also decide the presiding judge.
Earlier, in January 2025, a three-judge bench had further relaxed the conditions for appointing ad-hoc judges by allowing such appointments even when vacancies were below 20 per cent.
The 2021 decision had, however, reiterated that Article 224A should be invoked only after steps are taken to fill regular judicial vacancies.
According to sources, the five ad-hoc judges appointed to the Allahabad High Court have been specifically chosen to deal with long-pending criminal appeals, bail matters, and cases involving personal liberty.
The appointment process for ad-hoc judges is comparatively faster, as these judges have already served on the bench. Their past judgments are assessed by the High Court collegium, and unlike fresh appointments, no intelligence inputs are ordinarily sought unless there is a significant omission.
The Supreme Court collegium also dispenses with interviews in such cases, noting that it would not be appropriate to interview former judges.
At present, both the Supreme Court and High Court collegiums are selecting ad-hoc judges from among those who have retired within the last year, considering their age profile and familiarity with post-Covid judicial systems.
