Supreme Court Advocates-On-Record ... vs Union Of India on 6 October, 1993
6. The Supreme Court in the Second Judge's case, Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 268, observed that since the date of retirement of a High Court Judge is known, the entire process of filling in the vacancy to be caused by that retirement should be completed before one month of the date of the retirement so that on the very next day after the retirement, the new appointee can start functioning and in this way the work of the Court does not suffer. This was the regular practice during British days and for some time after Independence. However, it appears that a complete go-by has been given to the aforesaid nine Judges decision of the Supreme Court, and the plight of this Court is a glaring example of this, where vacancies have continued for years. Sometimes 300 cases are listed before a Judge and it is physically impossible that a Judge can decide 300 cases in one day. We are informed that some other High Courts also are in similar plight because the vacancies of the Judges have not been filled in. We earnestly request the Constitutional authorities concerned in the selection and appointment of High Court Judges to take the matter in all seriousness and promptitude realizing the gravity of the situation and fill up the vacancies at the earliest.