The Hindu : National : `Acting Chief Justice can discharge functions of Chief Justice'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Dec 23, 2004

National

National

`Acting Chief Justice can discharge functions of Chief Justice'

By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, DEC. 22 . A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has held that an acting Chief Justice of a High Court can discharge the functions of a Chief Justice.

A Bench, comprising the Chief Justice, R.C. Lahoti, Justice Shivaraj V. Patil, Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice B.N. Srikrishna and Justice G.P. Mathur, said there was no restriction under the Constitution on the performance of duties by an acting Chief Justice of the High Court. "Article 223 does not indicate which of the duties of the Chief Justice can be performed or which cannot be performed by the acting Chief Justice."

It said the appointment of the Chief Justice might take some time for various reasons, and consequently the acting Chief Justice continued to work for a longer period. But that did not take away the powers conferred by the Constitution on a judge to perform the duties of the Chief Justice.

The Bench said, "It is rule of prudence that the acting Chief Justice may not take major decisions which otherwise could have been taken by the Chief Justice, or which could wait for a Chief Justice."

Pointing to situations in which the post of Chief Justice remained vacant for long, the court said that if the acting Chief Justice was not allowed to discharge the duties of the office, it would result in an "anomalous position leading to paralysing of the working, or maybe, sometimes, creating a deadlock."

In this case, in the absence of the Chief Justice, the Acting Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court was consulted over the appointment of the president of the Commission and the High Court upheld such an appointment. (Section 16 of the Consumer Protection Act says the president of the State Consumer Commission shall be appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice).

The Bench held that the powers conferred on the acting Chief Justice under Article 223 were wide enough to include a recommendation for the appointment of the consumer commission president and dismissed the appeal.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National