Supreme Court Judge Strength Raised via Ordinance to Tackle Pendency
Source:The Hindu ↗
Why It Matters
The increase in the number of Supreme Court judges addresses the critical issue of judicial delays and case pendency, an important aspect of governance and access to justice. It also illustrates the interplay between Article 124(1) (Parliament's power) and Article 123 (President's ordinance power).
Summary
President Droupadi Murmu has promulgated the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2025, effectively raising the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court of India from 34 to 38 judges, inclusive of the Chief Justice of India. The ordinance invokes Article 123 of the Constitution to amend the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956. This legislative change is primarily driven by the urgent need to tackle the massive pendency of cases at the Supreme Court, which currently exceeds 93,000. Under Article 124(1), Parliament holds the power to determine the strength of the apex court, but the ordinance route was chosen to implement the change immediately.
Key Points
- President Droupadi Murmu promulgated an ordinance increasing the Supreme Court's maximum judge strength from 34 to 38, including the Chief Justice of India.
- The ordinance amends the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956.
- The move aims to address the significant backlog of cases in the apex court, which currently stands at over 93,000.
- Article 124(1) of the Constitution grants Parliament the authority to prescribe the number of judges in the Supreme Court.
- Article 123 was invoked to issue the ordinance since Parliament is not currently in session.
Important Terms
Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2025
A presidential ordinance issued to immediately increase the Supreme Court's sanctioned judge strength from 34 to 38 to address urgent judicial backlog.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Executive/Judiciary). Tests knowledge of Ordinance-making powers and executive intervention in judicial administration.
Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956
The primary legislation through which Parliament exercises its constitutional power to determine and increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Indian Constitution). Essential for understanding legislative control over the apex court's organizational structure.
Article 124(1) of the Constitution
Constitutional provision establishing the Supreme Court and empowering Parliament to increase the number of judges beyond the initial seven through law.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Constitutional Provisions). Tests understanding of the constitutional basis for judicial organization and separation of powers.
Article 123 of the Constitution
Empowers the President to promulgate ordinances during Parliamentary recess if immediate action is necessary; such ordinances have the same force as Acts.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Executive). Frequent topic regarding the limits and judicial review of executive legislative powers.
Case Pendency
The total number of unresolved cases awaiting disposal; currently exceeding 93,000 in the Supreme Court, necessitating an increase in judicial strength.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Judicial Reforms). Critical for analyzing barriers to the right to speedy justice and judicial efficiency.
Sanctioned Strength
The maximum number of judges authorized by law to serve in a court, currently raised to 38 for the Supreme Court.
UPSC context
GS Paper II (Judiciary). Important for discussing vacancies and the gap between authorized capacity and actual judicial resources.
Prelims Trap
"Increasing the number of Supreme Court judges requires a Constitutional Amendment Act under Article 368."
Under Article 124(1), Parliament alters the judge strength via an ordinary statute (the 1956 Act). No constitutional amendment is required.
Static Concepts Connected
Who determines the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court versus High Courts?
- Supreme Court: Article 124(1) vests this power exclusively in Parliament, which enacts ordinary legislation (like the 1956 Act) to alter the number of apex court judges.
- High Courts: Unlike the Supreme Court, Article 216 empowers the President of India to determine the strength of individual High Courts from time to time, depending on their workload.
Can an Ordinance under Article 123 amend existing laws and the Constitution?
- Amending Statutes: An ordinance has the exact same force as an Act of Parliament and can validly amend or repeal existing central statutes, such as the 1956 Judges Act.
- Constitutional Limits: An ordinance cannot be used to amend the Constitution of India itself, nor can it violate Fundamental Rights.
Cross-Topic Patterns
SC Pendency + Collegium Friction
Increasing sanctioned strength is only half the solution; filling these new vacancies promptly highlights the ongoing tension between the Executive and Judiciary over the Collegium system's efficiency and transparency.
Ordinance route for institutional shifts
Invoking Article 123 for structural expansions bypasses immediate parliamentary debate, feeding directly into GS2 themes on how excessive use of the ordinance-making power impacts the separation of powers.
A 2026 prelims statement will likely contrast who fixes the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court (Parliament) vs High Courts (President).
Linked PYQs · 4
Linked PYQs · 4
- 2025PrelimsGS1
With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements : I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act. II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right. III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 2017MainsGS2
Critically examine the Supreme Court's judgement on 'National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014' with reference to appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India.
- 2023MainsGS2
“Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy.” Comment.
- 2025MainsGS2
Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA.
