SC Collegium Names five Retired Judges as Ad-Hoc Judges for Allahabad HC

In a significant move to address mounting judicial delays, the collegium of the Supreme Court of India has approved the appointment of five retired judges as ad-hoc judges of the Allahabad High Court for a period of two years . The decision, taken at a meeting chaired by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant , invokes Article 224-A of the Constitution, a rarely used provision meant for judicial reinforcement during periods of heavy pressure.

The appointed judges, Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Justice Mohd. Aslam, Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi, Justice Renu Agarwal, and Justice Jyotsna Sharma will assist in clearing long-pending cases. Under Article 224-A , the Chief Justice of a High Court, with the President’s consent , may request a former High Court judge to resume duties temporarily. The constitutional design restricts this pathway to former judges, making it an emergency mechanism , not a substitute for regular appointments .

The move comes amid what the Supreme Court previously described as a “docket explosion” , with High Courts burdened by massive case pendency . The Allahabad High Court, among the country’s largest, faces an especially heavy caseload running into lakhs of pending matters. In April 2021 , the apex court revived this dormant provision and issued guidelines permitting ad-hoc appointments for two to three years to tackle arrears. High Courts were also allowed to appoint such judges up to 10 percent of their sanctioned strength.

The key advantage lies in experience and speed . Retired judges have already undergone constitutional scrutiny, understand court functioning, and can begin hearings immediately. Their focus is expected to be on old cases , allowing permanent judges to handle fresh filings and complex matters. Unlike new appointees, they bypass the lengthy collegium process and executive clearances.

Still, this is viewed as a temporary solution . Legal experts stress that durable relief requires filling permanent vacancies, modernising case management , and reducing procedural delays . The Supreme Court itself has cautioned that ad-hoc judges must not replace systematic recruitment.

By activating a long-unused constitutional tool, the judiciary signals both institutional urgency and a willingness to deploy innovative legal measures to ease pressure on the justice system while broader reforms continue.