Parliament’s handling of Justice Yashwant Varma’s resignation raises a constitutional question on the limits of impeachment. Parliament should table the inquiry report and close the matter, rather than continue a removal process that no longer has a sitting judge to remove.
The Lok Sabha Speaker plans to table a report of an inquiry committee under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 when Parliament reconvenes. Justice Yashwant Varma resigned with immediate effect, gave up judicial privileges, and stopped drawing judicial salary. On that basis, he is no longer a judge in the constitutional sense.
Article 121 permits Parliament to discuss judicial conduct only within the constitutional process for removing a judge. The removal mechanism exists to end with removal from office, and it cannot sensibly continue after resignation has already broken the constitutional link to office.
Background and earlier position
Related current affairs
- Is Yashwant Varma still a judge?
- Row over U.P. IAS officer’s ‘bid’ to influence civil judge deepens as HC takes serious exception
- Tribunals Reforms Bill passed amid din in Lok Sabha
- SC’s direction: independent National Tribunals Commission for transparent oversight
- Cong. moves privilege motion over Jitendra Singh’s ‘no firing’ claim
- Government to align future tribunal law with Supreme Court rulings on appointments and judicial independence