Resignation Only Option Before Justice Varma to Avoid Removal by Parliament, Say Rules

PTI, NEW DELHI, AUG 13, 2025 :  As Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla announced a committee to probe charges of corruption against Justice Yashwant Varma, resignation is the only option left for the Allahabad High Court judge to avoid removal by Parliament.

The inquiry committee comprises Supreme Court judge Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and senior Karnataka High Court advocate B V Acharya. "The committee will submit its report as early as possible. The proposal (for removal of Justice Varma) will remain pending till the receipt of the report of the inquiry committee," the Speaker told Lok Sabha on Tuesday.

Birla said he had received a proposal from 146 Lok Sabha members, including BJP's Ravi Shankar Prasad and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, seeking removal of Justice Varma on July 21.

Officials aware of the procedure to appoint and remove Supreme Court and High Court judges pointed out that while defending his case before lawmakers in any of the House, Justice Varma can announce that he is quitting and his verbal statement will be considered as his resignation.

Should he decide to resign, he will get pension and other benefits entitled to a retired High Court judge. But if he is removed by Parliament, he will be deprived of pension and other benefits, they noted.

According to Article 217 of the Constitution, a High Court judge "may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office". A judge's resignation does not require any approval. A simple resignation letter is sufficient. A judge may give a prospective date to step down. In such cases, the judge can withdraw the resignation before the date he or she has mentioned as the last day in office.

Removal by Parliament is the other way a judge can vacate office. Then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had written to the president and the Prime Minister to remove Justice Varma, mired in the cash discovery row. Justice Khanna's report was based on the findings of a three-judge in-house panel which investigated the case. Justice Khanna had prodded Varma to resign but he had refused, sources had earlier said.

According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the Speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought.