Article 220 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Here is a comprehensive explanation of Article 220 of the Constitution of India, including its text, interpretation, and relevant case law.
🧾 Article 220 – Restriction on Practice after Being a Permanent Judge
🔹 Text of Article 220:
"No person who, after the commencement of this Constitution, has held office as a permanent judge of a High Court shall plead or act in any court or before any authority in India, except the Supreme Court and the other High Courts."
Provided that nothing in this article shall prevent a retired judge of a High Court from acting as a judge in the performance of the duties of a judge under Article 127 or Article 224A, or from practising in the High Courts where he did not serve as a permanent judge.
📌 Key Interpretation of Article 220
| Feature | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Scope | Applies to permanent judges of a High Court after their retirement/resignation. |
| Restriction | They cannot practice law in any court or before any authority in India, except: |
The Supreme Court, or
Other High Courts (not the one where they served). |
| Objective | To preserve the dignity and impartiality of the judiciary and prevent undue influence. |
| Proviso | Allows such judges to:
Be re-appointed temporarily (Article 127 – SC, Article 224A – HC).
Practice in other HCs, not the one where they served as a judge. |
⚖️ Important Case Law Related to Article 220
1. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) Supp SCC 87
Issue: Independence of judiciary and appointment of judges.
Relevance: Court emphasized that post-retirement practice restrictions under Article 220 help maintain judicial independence and reduce potential bias or lobbying.
The judgment underlined the importance of constitutional safeguards, like Article 220, in upholding the dignity of judicial office.
2. V. C. Rangadurai v. D. Gopalan & Ors., (1979) 1 SCC 308
Issue: Misconduct of an advocate and whether ex-judges should practice.
Relevance: Supreme Court recognized that ex-judges must avoid practices that compromise their former office, indirectly supporting the principles behind Article 220.
3. Union of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth, (1977) 4 SCC 193
Context: Concerned with transfer of High Court judges and judicial independence.
Relevance: Reinforced the ethical obligations of judges post-retirement, including limitations on legal practice per Article 220, as a way to prevent conflict of interest.
⚠️ Practical Impact of Article 220
Former High Court judges cannot appear in the same court where they served, even in a different Bench or jurisdiction.
They can appear in the Supreme Court or High Courts of other states.
Helps avoid bias, favoritism, and undue influence on sitting judges by their former colleagues.
✅ Summary Table
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Article | 220 |
| Applies To | Permanent Judges of High Courts |
| Main Restriction | Cannot practice in same High Court after retirement |
| Permitted Practice | Only in Supreme Court and other High Courts |
| Judicial Ethics | Maintains independence and impartiality of judiciary |
| Related Articles | Article 127 (Ad hoc SC Judges), Article 224A (Ad hoc HC Judges) |
| Relevant Cases | S.P. Gupta, Rangadurai, Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth |
RELATED Blog
0 comments