Is Yashwant Varma still a judge?
Parliament is set to take up in the coming Monsoon Session the report of the Committee appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha under
Parliament is set to take up in the coming Monsoon Session the report of the Committee appointed by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 to investigate charges of misbehaviour against former Judge of the Allahabad and Delhi High Courts, Yashwant Varma, who has since resigned. The allegations against him arise from the discovery in March 2025 of partially burnt currency notes in an outhouse at his official residence. Mystery surrounds his current status and the future course of the pending proceedings in Parliament. On one hand, three months after his resignation, Mr. Varma continues to be listed by the Allahabad High Court and by the Department of Justice of the Union government as a sitting judge. This has given rise to misgivings about whether his resignation has taken effect or remains subject to acceptance by the President. On the other, it has been reported that following Mr. Varma’s resignation on April 9, 2026 “with immediate effect”, his status at the Bar was changed to “active” on resumption of practice. Some of his dues and benefits as a sitting judge have reportedly been stopped since the resignation. Four questions follow. (1) Is Mr. Varma’s resignation subject to acceptance by the President? Our Constitution vests 13 constitutional functionaries with the “power to resign at will”: the power to demit office at a time of their choosing, without their resignation being subject to acceptance by any authority. They may resign merely by writing under their hand addressed to an authority specified in the Constitution. No further action is necessary. Needing no acceptance, the power to resign at will is an essential safeguard for the independence of these offices. It protects incumbents from being forced to work under coercion, contrary to their conscience. The offices vesting incumbents with this power are: the President; the Vice-President; the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha; the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha; judge of the Supreme Court; judge of High Courts; Governors; the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of a State Assembly; the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of a State Legislative Council; and member of Public Service Commissions.
In contrast, Article 101 (3)(b) of the Constitution expressly says that the resignation of Members of Parliament is subject to acceptance by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, as the case may be. Under Article 190(3)(b), the resignations of members of State Legislative Assemblies and Legislative Councils are likewise subject to acceptance by the Speaker or the Chairman. A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs Gopal Chandra Misra (1978) unanimously reaffirmed the power of Supreme Court and High Court judges to resign at will. Justice S. Murtaza Fazal Ali dissented from the majority Judges who held that a resigning Judge could choose a future date and withdraw the resignation before that date. But Justice Ali reflected the unanimous view of the Bench that no acceptance was needed for resignation of judges. He wrote categorically that “the effectiveness of the resignation does not depend upon the acceptance of the resignation by the President…the resignation acts ex proprio vigore” (automatically without requiring any external action). At least 12 High Court judges have resigned since 2017. One Supreme Court judge, Justice Dalveer Bhandari, resigned in 2012 to join the International Court of Justice. Publicly available information suggests that these resignations have been handled in compliance with the law described above, coming into effect as the resigning judge stipulated, without the effectiveness of the resignation being dependent on acceptance by the President or by anyone else. (2) Can Mr. Varma still be held out as a sitting judge; can he continue to draw the benefits of office? Since Mr. Varma ceased to be a judge on April 9, describing him after that date as a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court in the Department of Justice’s list or on the website of the Allahabad High Court is clearly wrong.
The BriefWire