Part VI: The States

Chapter V - The High Courts in the States

Article 217: Appointment and Conditions of Judges of High Courts

Overview of Article 217: Appointment and Conditions of Judges of High Courts

Original Article:

(217) Appointment and Conditions of Judges of High Courts —

Every Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal, on the recommendation of the National Judicial Appointments Commission referred to in article 124A, and the Governor of the State, and, in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of the High Court, shall hold office, in the case of an additional or acting Judge, as provided in article 224, and in any other case, until he attains the age of sixty-two years:

Provided that—

  • A Judge may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office;
  • A Judge may be removed from his office by the President in the manner provided in clause (4) of article 124 for the removal of a Judge of the Supreme Court;
  • The office of a Judge shall be vacated by his being appointed by the President to be a Judge of the Supreme Court or by his being transferred by the President to any other High Court within the territory of India.

Explanation:

Article 217 defines the appointment, qualifications, tenure, and conditions for High Court judges. It ensures judicial independence while maintaining a structured process for appointments to uphold the integrity of the judiciary.

Key Points:

1. Appointment Process

Judges are appointed by the President in consultation with key judicial and executive authorities, ensuring a balanced and transparent process.

2. Qualifications

A candidate must have at least ten years of judicial experience or practice as an advocate in one or more High Courts to qualify for appointment.

3. Tenure and Retirement

The retirement age for High Court judges is 62, as established by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963.

Historical Significance:

The appointment process outlined in Article 217 reflects India’s commitment to judicial independence. Significant amendments, such as the Fifteenth Amendment, have enhanced the judiciary’s stability by standardizing the retirement age.

Real-Life Examples:

1. NJAC Case: The striking down of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) in 2015 reaffirmed the collegium system, emphasizing the judiciary’s independence in appointments.

2. State-Specific Caseload Management: States like Uttar Pradesh, with heavy caseloads, have seen frequent appointments under Article 217 to address backlog issues effectively.

Debates and Deliberations:

During the Constituent Assembly debates on June 6 and 7, 1949, Mr. B. Pocker Sahib advocated for reducing political influence in judicial appointments by limiting the executive’s role. He emphasized consulting senior judiciary members for transparency.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar supported a consultative process, balancing judicial expertise and executive authority. The assembly adopted his proposal, ensuring the President’s role in appointments while consulting the judiciary.

References:

  • Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963.
  • Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015).
  • Constituent Assembly Debates on judicial appointments.
Article 216 Article 218