Judicial vacancies directly affect the courts’ ability to protect rights and deliver timely justice.
by Adv. Dr. Chinmay Bhosale · 5 MINS READ
The figures cited in this article 411 vacancies across India’s High Courts and five in the Supreme Court as of 1 April 2021 highlight the urgency of completing judicial appointments.
Leaving these posts unfilled places additional pressure on an already overburdened system. The consequences are borne by litigants whose cases remain unresolved and by citizens whose confidence in the administration of justice depends on effective courts.
Courts as the Foundation of Constitutional Protection
Two principles lie at the heart of democracy: the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights. Courts uphold both.
Indian tradition accords courts and judges a position of profound respect. Beyond that tradition, the judiciary serves a practical constitutional purpose: it enables citizens to enforce their rights and holds the legal system together.
Against this background, the scale of judicial vacancies is deeply troubling. Understanding how appointments are made helps explain why timely action is essential.
How High Court Judges Are Appointed
Under Article 217 of the Constitution, High Court judges are appointed by the President.
The article describes the appointment process as beginning with the Chief Justice of the relevant High Court forwarding proposed names to the Chief Minister. Copies are also sent to the Governor, the Union Ministry of Law and Justice and the Chief Justice of India.
After consulting the Chief Minister, the Governor is expected to forward the recommendations promptly to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice. Following its scrutiny, the Ministry seeks the Chief Justice of India’s views.
The Chief Justice of India consults the two senior-most Supreme Court judges. Names approved through this process are then taken forward for appointment.
According to the procedure described in the article, the process should begin six months before an anticipated vacancy arises. Timely initiation is therefore an important safeguard against posts remaining unfilled.
How Supreme Court Judges Are Appointed
Appointments to the Supreme Court are made by the President under Article 124 of the Constitution.
When a vacancy is anticipated, the Chief Justice of India is expected to recommend a suitable candidate after consulting the four senior-most Supreme Court judges. The recommendation, accompanied by reasons, is forwarded to the Ministry of Law and Justice.
The Ministry places the recommendation before the Prime Minister, who advises the President. Following presidential approval, the Ministry issues the appointment.
The Scale of the Vacancies
The article cites a Ministry of Law and Justice report dated 1 April 2021, recording the following position:
Court or category | Position reported |
India’s 25 High Courts | 1,080 sanctioned judicial posts |
High Court vacancies | 411 posts, approximately 38% |
Allahabad High Court | 77 vacancies—the highest number |
Supreme Court | 34 sanctioned posts, including five vacancies |
Except for Manipur, Meghalaya and Sikkim, all the remaining 22 High Courts had vacancies of varying numbers.
These figures show that the problem extended across the judicial system.
Delays and Institutional Responsibility
During a hearing in March 2021 concerning High Court vacancies, the Supreme Court called on the Union Government to complete the appointment process within time.
The proceedings revealed that recommendations had been made for vacant posts without subsequent concrete action. One hearing also brought to light that appointments had remained pending for six to seven months.
The Government, in turn, stated that recommendations from several High Courts had not yet been received, contributing to the delay.
Consultation and scrutiny are part of the constitutional process, and some time may be required to respect the roles of different institutions. Nevertheless, the author stresses that the Government must take responsibility for ensuring that appointments are completed without prolonged delay.
A parliamentary committee report in March 2021 similarly emphasised the need to fill vacancies in the High Courts and Supreme Court promptly to preserve public confidence.
The Human Cost of Unfilled Posts
India’s courts already face a substantial backlog. Judicial vacancies compound that burden and make timely disposal more difficult.
The costs extend beyond the courtroom. Litigants and others involved in proceedings lose time that could otherwise be used productively. Instead, they remain occupied with disputes that continue for years.
The principle that justice delayed is justice denied is therefore a practical concern. A right loses much of its value when enforcing it requires an excessive wait.
Share
