The Constitution of India
Article 127
Appointment of ad hoc Judges
(1) If at any time there should not be a quorum of the Judges of the Supreme Court available to hold or continue any session of the Court, the Chief Justice of India may, with the previous consent of the President and after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, request in writing the attendance at the sittings of the Court, as an ad hoc Judge, for such period as may be necessary, of a Judge of a High Court duly qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice of India.
(2) It shall be the duty of the Judge who has been so designated, in priority to other duties of his office, to attend the sittings of the Supreme Court at the time and for the period for which his attendance is required, and while so attending he shall have all the jurisdiction, powers and privileges, and shall discharge the duties, of a Judge of the Supreme Court.
Why this exists
The framers included this provision to ensure the Supreme Court could keep functioning even if a shortage of judges (due to vacancies, illness, or other reasons) left it without enough members to hear cases. Rather than letting proceedings stall, Article 127 provides a constitutional mechanism to temporarily borrow a qualified and experienced High Court judge, preserving continuity in the administration of justice at the apex level.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: An ad hoc judge appointed under Article 127 has less power than a regular Supreme Court judge.
Fact: The Article explicitly states the ad hoc judge has all the jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a Supreme Court judge while attending its sittings. - Myth: The Chief Justice of India can appoint an ad hoc judge on his own authority alone.
Fact: The appointment requires the previous consent of the President and consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned.