Unpacking Articles 222 to 225 of the Indian Constitution: A Discussion on Relevance and Case Laws in the Modern Era

Unpacking Articles 222 to 225 of the Indian Constitution: A Discussion on Relevance and Case Laws in the Modern Era

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution, as the guiding document of the nation, provides a comprehensive framework for the functioning of the judiciary and the appointment and transfer of judges. Articles 222 to 225 specifically address the transfer of judges between High Courts and the establishment of subordinate courts. In this article, we engage in a discussion on the relevance of these articles in the modern era, exploring their significance and analyzing relevant case laws that have shaped their interpretation.

Article 222: Transfer of judges from one High Court to another

Article 222 grants the President of India the power to transfer a judge from one High Court to another. The provision aims to ensure the efficient administration of justice and the equitable distribution of judicial resources. In the case of Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1993), the Supreme Court emphasized that the power to transfer judges should be exercised sparingly and for compelling reasons, while also taking into account the views of the Chief Justice of India.

Article 223: Appointment of acting Chief Justice

Article 223 allows for the appointment of an acting Chief Justice of a High Court when the office of the Chief Justice is vacant or when the Chief Justice is temporarily absent. This provision ensures the uninterrupted functioning of the High Court and the preservation of its independence. In the case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the appointment of an acting Chief Justice, emphasizing the need for the High Court's effective administration and smooth functioning.

Article 224: Appointment of additional and acting Judges

Article 224 empowers the President to appoint additional judges to High Courts when there is a temporary increase in the judicial workload. This provision enables the swift disposal of cases and ensures access to justice. In the case of Union of India v. R. Gandhi (2010), the Supreme Court held that the appointment of additional judges should be made in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, maintaining the principle of judicial independence and impartiality.

Article 225: Jurisdiction of existing High Courts

Article 225 determines the jurisdiction of existing High Courts and ensures that their powers and functions are not affected by subsequent legislative changes. This provision preserves the High Courts' authority to adjudicate matters within their territorial jurisdiction. In the case of State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963), the Supreme Court emphasized that the jurisdiction of a High Court is an essential attribute of its independence and should be preserved and protected.

Conclusion:

Articles 222 to 225 of the Indian Constitution hold significant importance in defining the transfer of judges, the appointment of acting judges, and the jurisdiction of High Courts. In the modern era, it is crucial to evaluate the relevance and interpretation of these provisions, keeping in mind the evolving needs of the judiciary and the society it serves.

Through relevant case laws, the judiciary has provided valuable insights into the interpretation and application of these articles. These cases have emphasized the principles of judicial independence, efficiency, and the need for equitable distribution of judicial resources.

As India's legal landscape continues to evolve, it is essential to ensure the proper functioning of the judiciary, effective case management, and access to justice. The interpretation and application of these constitutional provisions should be adaptive to the changing times while upholding the principles of justice, independence, and accountability in the modern era.