Judges Inquiry Act proceedings against former High Court judge Yashwant Varma
This topic directly addresses critical constitutional provisions regarding judicial resignation, landmark legal precedents, the functioning of the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968, and reforms for judicial accountability.
Notes
Constitutional provision on judicial resignation: 13 constitutional functionaries in India possess the power to 'resign at will' by writing under their hand to a specified constitutional authority, without requiring acceptance by any external authority.
Offices with power to resign at will (no acceptance required): President, Vice-President, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Speaker and Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, Judges of the Supreme Court, Judges of High Courts, Governors, Speaker and Deputy Speaker of State Legislative Assemblies, Chairman and Deputy Chairman of State Legislative Councils, and Members of Public Service Commissions.
Offices where resignation requires acceptance: Under Article 101(3)(b) for Members of Parliament (accepted by Speaker/Chairman) and Article 190(3)(b) for Members of State Legislatures (accepted by Speaker/Chairman).
Judicial Precedent (Union of India vs Gopal Chandra Misra, 1978): A 5-judge Constitution Bench held that SC and HC judges can resign at will and the resignation acts 'ex proprio vigore' (automatically without external action). Justice S. Murtaza Fazal Ali dissented regarding whether a resignation with a prospective date could be withdrawn before that date, but the bench unanimously agreed that no acceptance is needed.
Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 proceedings upon judge's resignation: The report of the Inquiry Committee appointed under the Act must be laid before both Houses of Parliament as a statutory duty, regardless of resignation.
Effect on removal motion: If a judge resigns, they cease to hold office. Under Section 6 of the Act, because a removal motion lapses and cannot be discussed against a former judge, the report itself cannot be discussed by Parliament along with the motion.
Proposed Reforms for Judicial Accountability: Amending the Constitution to make a judge's resignation subject to acceptance during pendency of removal proceedings (with power of acceptance vested in the Chief Justice of India to safeguard independence), and amending the 1968 Act to allow Parliament to discuss inquiry reports even post-resignation.
Questions
Discuss the constitutional framework governing the resignation of High Court and Supreme Court judges in India. How does a judge's resignation affect pending proceedings under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968?150 words
Examine the mechanism for ensuring judicial accountability in India under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. What challenges arise when a judge facing removal proceedings resigns prior to parliamentary consideration, and what reforms have been suggested to address this gap?250 words
Prelims
According to the Constitution of India, the resignation of which of the following officeholders requires formal acceptance by an authority to become effective?
A Judge of a High Court
A Member of Parliament
A Member of a Public Service Commission
The Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha
Answer B
What principle regarding the resignation of High Court and Supreme Court judges was affirmed by the 5-judge Constitution Bench in Union of India vs Gopal Chandra Misra (1978)?
Resignation requires prior approval from the Chief Justice of India.
Resignation is subject to formal acceptance by the President of India.
Resignation acts ex proprio vigore and does not require acceptance by any authority.
Resignation cannot be tendered while inquiry proceedings are pending under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.