Loading…
The President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, appointed three Judicial Officers — Santosh Sharma, Sushma Sawant and Sudhir Kumar — as Judges of the Chhattisgarh High Court.
Advocate Nchumbemo Mozhui and Judicial Officer Helen Dawngliani were appointed Additional Judges of the Gauhati High Court.
Judges of a High Court are appointed under Article 217; Additional Judges are appointed under Article 224 for a term not exceeding two years.
Names originate with the Supreme Court collegium — the CJI and the two senior-most Supreme Court judges — and travel through the Memorandum of Procedure before the President's warrant.
Appointment and conditions of office of a High Court judge — appointed by the President after consultation with the CJI, the Governor of the state and, for a judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of that High Court. Retirement age is 62 years.
Empowers the President to appoint Additional Judges when there is a temporary increase in business or an accumulation of arrears, for a period not exceeding two years — the provision under which the two Gauhati appointments were made.
Allows a retired High Court judge to sit as an ad hoc judge with the President's prior consent, on a reference by the Chief Justice of that High Court; inserted by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963.
Both were struck down by a Constitution Bench on 16 October 2015 in the Fourth Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India) by a 4:1 majority, for violating judicial independence as part of the basic structure. The collegium was thereby revived.
The executive-judiciary document that sets out how recommendations are initiated, examined and exchanged before the President issues the warrant of appointment; it is not a statute and remains under negotiation since the 2015 verdict.
| Aspect | Judge (Article 217) | Additional Judge (Article 224) |
|---|---|---|
| Tenure | Until the age of 62 years | A fixed term not exceeding two years, and in no case beyond 62 years |
| Trigger for appointment | A vacancy in the sanctioned permanent strength | Temporary increase in business or accumulation of arrears |
| Confirmation | Already permanent | May later be appointed a permanent judge if a vacancy arises |
| Example in this release | Three Judicial Officers in the Chhattisgarh High Court | Two appointees in the Gauhati High Court |
Exercises jurisdiction over Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh — the widest multi-state jurisdiction among Indian High Courts after Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura got their own High Courts
High Court for the state of Chhattisgarh, created when the state was carved out of Madhya Pradesh
Recommends appointments and transfers of High Court and Supreme Court judges; for High Court appointments it comprises the CJI and the two senior-most Supreme Court judges, acting on a proposal from the High Court collegium
First Judges Case — 'consultation' with the CJI held not to mean concurrence, tilting appointments towards the executive.
Second Judges Case — consultation reinterpreted as concurrence; the collegium system is born.
Third Judges Case — the Presidential Reference fixes the collegium's composition and consultation process.
Fourth Judges Case — the 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act are struck down 4:1; the collegium is restored.
GS Paper 2 > Polity > Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Judiciary
General Awareness > Indian Polity > High Courts
Who appoints the Judges of the High Court?
Answer: The President
Who appoints the Judges of the High Court?
Answer: President of India
Which Article of the Indian Constitution deals with the "Transfer of a Judge from one High Court to another"?
Answer: Article 222
Which Article of the Indian Constitution deals with the "Transfer of a Judge from one High Court to another"?
Answer: Article 222
A High Court judge appointed under Article 224 for a term of up to two years to clear a temporary rise in workload or arrears.
The non-statutory document governing how the judiciary and the government process judicial appointment recommendations.
The 2015 Constitution Bench ruling striking down the NJAC and the 99th Amendment as violating judicial independence.