maintaining a permanent record of all proceedings, judgments, and orders. This designation is vital for ensuring transparency and accountability, as these records can be referenced in future cases and serve as precedents.

Contempt Powers: High Courts are empowered to punish individuals for contempt of court. This authority is essential for maintaining the dignity and authority of the judiciary, ensuring that its orders and rulings are respected and followed. Contempt proceedings serve as a tool to uphold the rule of law and deter any attempts to undermine judicial processes.

Composition of High Courts (Article 216)

Judicial Structure: Each High Court is composed of a Chief Justice and a specified number of other judges. The exact number of judges is determined by the President of India based on the needs of the court. This composition allows for a robust judicial structure capable of handling varying caseloads.

No Maximum Limit: The Constitution does not set a maximum limit on the number of judges that can serve in a High Court. This lack of restriction provides the judiciary with the necessary flexibility to expand and adapt to the growing demands of justice in an evolving society.

Appointment and Tenure of High Court Judges (Article 217)

Appointment Process:

- Judges are appointed by the President of India based on a consultative process involving the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State, and the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court. This multi-tiered approach is designed to ensure that appointments are made based on merit, legal acumen, and suitability for judicial responsibilities.

Tenure:

- Judges serve until the age of 62, which allows them to accumulate significant experience and wisdom in judicial decision-making. This age limit ensures that judges are well-equipped to handle complex legal issues and provide just outcomes.

Early Vacation:

Judges may vacate their positions through several avenues:

- Resignation: Judges can resign voluntarily by submitting a written resignation to the President.

- Resignation: Judges can resign voluntarily by submitting a written resignation to the President.

- Removal Process: Similar to the procedure for Supreme Court judges, High Court judges can be removed through a parliamentary process requiring a two-thirds majority in both Houses. This rigorous procedure safeguards against arbitrary dismissals.

Qualifications for Appointment:

Candidates must be citizens of India and possess significant legal experience, having held a judicial office for at least ten years or served as an advocate in a High Court for a minimum of ten years. This ensures that appointed judges have the necessary expertise to adjudicate effectively.

6. Judicial Independence and Accountability

• Balance of Powers: The interplay between the executive and judiciary is crucial for maintaining judicial independence. The collegium system empowers judges to make appointments without external pressure, thereby preserving the integrity of the judicial system.

• Judicial Accountability: While judges enjoy considerable autonomy, they are also subject to a structured removal process requiring significant parliamentary consensus. This mechanism ensures that judicial conduct is held to a high standard and that judges remain accountable for their actions.

Removal of High Court Judges (Article 218)

• Removal Procedure: The process for removing High Court judges’ mirrors that of Supreme Court judges. A judge can only be removed by the President, following a formal address from both Houses of Parliament. This ensures that removals are based on collective legislative will, safeguarding against arbitrary dismissals.

• Removal Procedure: The process for removing High Court judges’ mirrors that of Supreme Court judges. A judge can only be removed by the President, following a formal address from both Houses of Parliament. This ensures that removals are based on collective legislative will, safeguarding against arbitrary dismissals.

Oath or Affirmation (Article 219)

Every High Court judge must take an oath or affirmation before assuming office. This solemn commitment to uphold the Constitution and the law is critical for instilling public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality.

Restrictions on Practice After Tenure (Article 220)

Prohibition on Practice: Once a person has served as a permanent High Court judge, they are prohibited from practicing law in any court or before any authority in India, except for the Supreme Court and other High Courts. This restriction is essential to prevent conflicts of interest and uphold the dignity of the judiciary, ensuring that judges do not exploit their previous positions for personal gain.

Salaries and Allowances of Judges (Article 221)

• Salary Determination: The salaries and allowances of High Court judges are determined by Parliament through legislative action. Until such provisions are enacted, judges are compensated as outlined in the Second Schedule of the Constitution. This provision ensures judges are adequately remunerated for their responsibilities.

• Benefits and Protections: Judges are entitled to various allowances and benefits related to leave and pensions. Importantly, these cannot be altered to their disadvantage after their appointment, ensuring financial security and independence.

Transfer of High Court Judges (Article 222)

The President has the power to transfer judges between High Courts based on recommendations from the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). This transfer process includes:

Transfers involve consultations with the Chief Justice of India, a collegium of the Supreme Court, and the Chief Justices of both the originating and receiving High Courts. This collaborative approach ensures transparency and collective decision-making in judicial administration.

The Supreme Court emphasized the necessity of judicial review in the transfer process in K. Ashok Reddy vs. Government of India, allowing only the transferred judge to challenge such decisions. This protects against arbitrary actions and reinforces judicial fairness.

Appointment of Acting Chief Justice (Article 223)

Temporary Appointment: When the Chief Justice of a High Court is unavailable or when the office is vacant, the President may appoint another High Court judge to perform the Chief Justice’s duties temporarily. This provision ensures continuity in leadership and maintains the effective functioning of the court.

Appointment of Additional and Acting Judges (Article 224)

• Additional Judges: The President can appoint additional judges for a High Court for a limited period (up to two years) to address temporary increases in caseload. This flexibility allows the judiciary to respond dynamically to fluctuations in demand for judicial services.

• Acting Judges: When a permanent judge is absent or unable to perform their duties, an acting judge may be appointed to ensure that court functions continue without disruption.

• Age Limit: Additional or acting judges must vacate their positions upon reaching the age of 62, thereby maintaining a standard for judicial service and ensuring the continuity of experienced judges.

Appointment of Retired Judges (Article 224A)

• Ad-hoc Appointments: The NJAC may, upon request from the Chief Justice of a High Court, call upon retired judges to serve temporarily. These retired judges possess the same powers and privileges as regular judges, ensuring that their experience contributes to the efficient functioning of the High Court.

• Supreme Court Guidelines: In Lok Prahari vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court established specific guidelines for appointing ad-hoc judges, stipulating criteria such as:

• Vacancies exceeding 20% of sanctioned strength.

• Cases pending for over five years.

• Low case disposal rates.

• Emphasis on Regular Appointments: The Court underscored that ad-hoc appointments should not substitute for regular judicial appointments, highlighting the importance of addressing existing vacancies promptly to maintain judicial effectiveness.

Jurisdiction of Existing High Courts (Article 225)

• Continuity of Jurisdiction: This article ensures that the jurisdiction of existing High Courts, along with the laws they administered, remains unchanged upon the commencement of the Constitution. This provision is crucial for preserving the authority and functions of these courts, maintaining public confidence in the continuity of legal processes.

• Judicial Authority: Judges retain their powers to create rules and regulate court proceedings, ensuring consistency in the application of legal standards and adherence to due process.

• Revenue Jurisdiction: Previous restrictions concerning original jurisdiction in revenue matters are lifted, granting High Courts greater authority to handle such cases. This change enhances their ability to address a broader range of legal issues effectively.

Power of High Courts to Issue Certain Writs (Article 226)

High Courts are empowered to issue various writs, including:

i. Habeas Corpus: Protects individuals from unlawful detention, safeguarding personal liberty.

ii. Mandamus: Directs authorities to perform their public duties, ensuring accountability in governance.

ii. Mandamus: Directs authorities to perform their public duties, ensuring accountability in governance.

iv. Quo Warranto: Questions a person's right to hold public office, promoting transparency and accountability in public service.

iv. Quo Warranto: Questions a person's right to hold public office, promoting transparency and accountability in public service.

Territorial Jurisdiction: High Courts can exercise writ jurisdiction beyond their territorial limits, allowing them to address cases that may arise from outside their immediate jurisdiction, thus enhancing access to justice for all citizens.

Interim Orders: If a High Court issues an interim order without notifying the affected parties, they can apply to have it vacated. The High Court is obliged to resolve such applications within two weeks, thereby protecting the rights of those affected by its decisions.

Relation to Supreme Court Powers: The authority granted to High Courts under this article complements the Supreme Court's powers under Article 32, which focuses on the enforcement of fundamental rights. This interrelationship strengthens the overall framework of judicial review in India.

Power of Superintendence over All Courts by the High Court (Article 227)

• Supervisory Jurisdiction: High Courts possess supervisory powers over all courts and tribunals within their jurisdiction, ensuring that these lower courts operate within legal confines and adhere to judicial norms.

• Functions of Supervision:

• High Courts can request performance reports from subordinate courts, allowing for effective assessments and improvements in judicial administration.

• High Courts have the authority to issue rules governing the practices of lower courts, fostering uniformity and consistency in judicial processes across the State.

• High Courts can prescribe conditions and processes for the functioning of lower courts, ensuring that they maintain the necessary standards for justice.

High Courts play a vital role in India's judicial system, ensuring accessible justice at the state level while upholding the Constitution. With their established powers, appointment mechanisms, and supervisory roles, High Courts not only maintain judicial independence but also ensure accountability and transparency.