Supreme Court's Acceptance of Ordinance for Additional Judges Raises Judicial Independence Concerns

The Supreme Court's acceptance of a Presidential Ordinance to increase the sanctioned strength of judges from 34 to 38, leading to the appointment of five new judges (three to newly created posts), raises significant questions about judicial independence and security of tenure. The article draws parallels to historical instances, like President Roosevelt's court-packing plan, which were rejected to preserve an independent judiciary. It highlights that an Ordinance's temporary nature and the possibility of its lapse or disapproval by Parliament could make the tenure of judges appointed under it precarious, potentially creating an obligation to the executive. The Supreme Court itself has previously ruled against governance by repromulgated ordinances, calling it a "fraud on the Constitution."

Key Points

  • The Supreme Court accepted a Presidential Ordinance to increase its sanctioned strength from 34 to 38 judges, leading to appointments to newly created posts.
  • This move raises concerns about judicial independence and the security of tenure for judges appointed via a temporary Ordinance.
  • Historically, attempts to alter court composition for political reasons, like Roosevelt's court-packing plan, have been resisted to protect judicial autonomy.
  • An Ordinance's temporary nature means it can be withdrawn or lapse, potentially leaving judges appointed under it in a precarious position.
  • The Supreme Court itself has previously criticized the use of ordinances as a parallel source of legislation, deeming it a "fraud on the Constitution."

Exam Facts

  • Sanctioned strength of Supreme Court judges increased from 34 to 38 via Presidential Ordinance.
  • Article 124(1) of the Constitution allows Parliament to prescribe the number of judges.
  • Article 123 of the Constitution deals with the President's power to promulgate ordinances.
  • D.C. Wadhwa vs State of Bihar (1986) and Krishna Kumar Singh vs State of Bihar (2017) ruled against repromulgated ordinances.

Read it. Retain it. Recall it.

Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.

Get it on Google Play

All current affairs of 8 June 2026