Supreme Court Collegium, in a historic move approved appointing five retired judges as ad hoc judges of the Allahabad High Court under Article 224-A to reduce vacancies and pendency, ensuring faster justice delivery nationwide effectively.
NEW DELHI: In a noteworthy and unprecedented decision to tackle judicial vacancies and backlogs, the Supreme Court Collegium has suggested the appointment of five retired judges as ad hoc Judges of the Allahabad High Court. This decision was made during the Collegium’s meeting on February 3, 2026.
The Collegium has given its approval for these appointments under Article 224-A of the Constitution of India, with a proposed tenure of two years. The retired judges recommended for this role are:
- Shri Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan
- Shri Justice Mohd. Aslam
- Shri Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
- Smt. Justice Renu Agarwal
- Smt. Justice Jyotsna Sharma
Article 224-A of the Constitution:
Ad-hoc judges are appointed on a temporary basis to meet specific judicial requirements, such as clearing pending cases or addressing vacancies when regular judges are unavailable.
The recommendation is based on Article 224-A of the Constitution, a provision often considered to be a dormant power within the legal framework specifically designed to address judicial backlog.
224A. Appointment of retired Judges at sittings of High Courts:
“Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the National Judicial Appointments Commission on a reference made to it by the Chief Justice of a High Court for any State, may with the previous consent of the President, request any person who has held the office of Judge of that Court or of any other High Court to sit and act as a Judge of the High Court for that State, and every such person so requested shall, while so sitting and acting, be entitled to such allowances as the President may by order determine and have all the jurisdiction, powers and privileges of, but shall not otherwise be deemed to be, a Judge of that High Court:
Provided that nothing in this article shall be deemed to require any such person as aforesaid to sit and act as a Judge of that High Court unless he consents so to do.”
Key Features of Article 224-A:
- Appointment of Retired Judges: This article empowers the Chief Justice of a State’s High Court, with prior approval from the President, to invite any individual who has served as a Judge of that court or any other High Court to act as a Judge of the High Court for that State.
- Purpose: The provision aims to leverage the experience and expertise of retired judges to help reduce significant case backlogs, commonly referred to as the “docket explosion.” It is important to note that this differs from the appointment of ‘Additional Judges’ under Article 224.
- Status and Powers: When serving under this article, appointed judges receive allowances as determined by the President and possess full jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a Judge of that High Court. However, they are not counted as judges of that High Court for seniority or transfer purposes.
- Activation: In the landmark Lok Prahari Through Its General Secretary S.N. Shukla (Retd.) v. Union of India & Ors. (2021), the Supreme Court outlined guidelines for activating this article, highlighting its necessity when case pendency reaches certain levels.
The Supreme Court, in Lok Prahari Case, invoked Article 224A of the Constitution, which permits the appointment of retired judges as ad-hoc judges, to address the growing backlog of cases, particularly criminal appeals. The Court laid down specific guidelines governing such appointments and clarified the manner in which ad-hoc judges should function, including their association with serving judges on benches.
The Supreme Court, on January 30, 2025 eased earlier restrictions by granting High Courts greater autonomy to appoint between two and five ad-hoc judges, subject to a maximum of 10% of the sanctioned judicial strength. It also directed that ad-hoc judges should hear criminal appeals alongside regular judges.
The Court, in December 2025, further revised the earlier framework by relaxing rigid bench composition norms. It empowered Chief Justices of High Courts to decide how ad-hoc judges should be assigned and how benches should be constituted, taking into account practical difficulties, such as the unwillingness of some retired judges to serve in junior positions.
Procedures for Appointment:
Under Article 224A of the Constitution of India, the Chief Justice of a High Court may, with the approval of the President and the consent of the retired judge concerned, appoint former High Court judges to serve temporarily.
- The appointment process is governed by the Memorandum of Procedure (MOP), 1998, which was formulated following the establishment of the collegium system for judicial appointments.
- Once a retired judge agrees to accept the assignment, the Chief Justice of the High Court forwards her name along with the proposed tenure to the State’s Chief Minister.
- The Chief Minister then transmits the recommendation to the Union Law Minister, who seeks the opinion of the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
- After considering the CJI’s advice, the matter is placed before the Prime Minister, who submits the final recommendation to the President for approval.
In Lok Prahari v. Union of India (2021), the Supreme Court held that proposals for appointing retired judges under Article 224A must be processed through the Supreme Court collegium. As per the collegium system, the CJI is required to consult the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court while considering appointments to the High Courts.
The implementation of this provision aims to strengthen the judicial capacity of the Allahabad High Court, which is one of the busiest courts in the country.
The recommended appointments are now awaiting final approval and notification from the Central Government.