The Constitution defines permanent judges as those who are appointed by the President till their retirement at sixty-two. Temporary judges are called additional judges who are appointed by the President for a maximum term of two years. The practice is going on right in the Capital's high court even though it was banned in 1982 by the seven-judge bench that decided the first judges case, S.P. Gupta vs Union of India. The Delhi High court has a strength of 31 permanent posts. Only 24 are filled in spite of the existence of seven permanent vacancies.
New judges continue to be appointed on a two-year contract as additional judges.
Since it is all done secretly the citizens come to know about this only after the appointments are published in the press. These contractual two-year appointments are a violation of the Supreme Court judgment. The permanent ones are appointed under Article 217of the Constitution which stipulates a consultation amo-ngst the chief justice of the high court, the governor of the state concerned, the Chief Justice of India and the President. The Governor brings in the ruling politicians of the state and the President brings the ruling politicians of the Centre since both are bound to act by the advice given by the ruling politicians. But all this changed in 1993 when a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Advocates on Record Association vs Union of India overturned the S.P. Gupta case to hold that what the Chief Justice of India recommends is final.