'Supreme Court Considering': Bombay HC Refuses To Pass Orders On PIL For Expediting Appointment Of High Court Judges, Adjourns Hearing

"At present a similar petition is before Supreme Court for consideration. Therefore, we find no reason to pass any orders", the court stated.

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Santosh Govindrao Chapalgaonkar posted the matter to February 14, 2023 for further consideration.

The court was referring to the Supreme Court's order dated December 8, 2022 in Lok Prahari v. Union of India in which the SC said that some 'out of the box thinking' is required. It also stated that appointment process of ad-hoc Judges should not become so cumbersome that it is unworkable.

Earlier, former Chief Justice Dipankar Datta had recused from hearing the PIL.

The PIL, filed by Dr. Sharmila Ghuge, a law professor at Mumbai University, also prays that retired high court judges be appointed as ad-hoc judges as per article 224A of the Constitution till the process of fulfilling the sanctioned strength of judges is completed.

Currently, against a sanctioned strength of 94 judges, the Bombay High Court has 39 permanent and 26 additional Judges, some of whom will retire soon.

The petition seeks that the Apex Court guidelines on appointment of ad-hoc Judges in HCs in Lok Prahari v. Union of India be implemented by the Bombay High Court. The guidelines need to be followed if there are more than 20% vacancies in a court. Bombay High Court has almost 31% vacancy currently.

Case no. – PIL(L)/26201/2022 [Original]

Case Title – Dr. Sharmila Ghuge v. Union of India