What are judicial transfer rules?

• Justice Yashwant Varma has been repatriated to his parent High Court in Allahabad, India, following allegations of charred currency notes being recovered from his residence.

• The move was proposed after Delhi High Court Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya sought an in-house inquiry into the matter.

• Varma denies the allegations, calling them a “conspiracy to malign” him.

• Article 222(1) of the Constitution allows the President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI), to transfer a judge from one High Court to another.

• The Supreme Court has interpreted this provision extensively, particularly through the First, Second, and Third Judges cases.

• The First Judges case affirms the executive’s primacy in judicial appointments and transfers.

• The Second Judges case institutionalizes the collegium system, ensuring that the latter’s opinion prevails in case of disagreement between the President and the CJI.

• The Third Judges case refines the collegium system, mandating transfer recommendations be made by the CJI in consultation with the four seniormost judges.

• A report by the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) raises serious concerns about judicial independence in India, citing growing executive interference, opacity in appointments, and weak accountability mechanisms.

• To address these concerns, the Narendra Modi government proposed sweeping reforms to judicial appointments, including the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014.

• However, the law was challenged by the Supreme Court due to the veto power granted to any two dissenting NJAC members, potentially allowing the Law Minister and the two eminent members to override the judiciary’s majority within the commission.

• Justice Varma’s transfer seems intended to avert an administrative impasse in Delhi, risking stalling crucial decision-making processes.