Justice Nisha Banu’s failure to assume office at Kerala HC 2 months after transfer from Madras prompts query in parliament

Justice Nisha Banu's delay in assuming office at Kerala High Court following her transfer from Madras High Court in October has led a question in the Lok Sabha.

Central government had notified Justice Banu's transfer on October 14. However, she is yet to take charge as a judge of the Kerala High Court even after about two months.

According to media reports, Justice Banu's failure to assume office at Kerala High Court has led to a disquiet among the Bar members. In response to a story about the Bar's reaction, the judge had told The Hindu that she has applied for leave.

She also revealed that she had sought reconsideration of her transfer.

"When approached for her reaction, Justice Banu said, she had submitted an earned leave application at the Madras High Court in view of her son’s marriage and was simultaneously awaiting the result of a request made for reconsideration of her transfer to the Kerala High Court," the newspaper reported last month, while quoting the judge.

In this regard, Congress MP Km Sudha R asked the Union law ministry to clarify whether Justice Banu continued to be part of the Madras High Court collegium and whether she has signed any list of candidates recommended for judgeship.

The parliamentarian also asked the Union government to reveal whether the judge has sought reconsideration of her transfer.

However, the government did not address these queries directly. Instead, it limited its response to outlining the applicable constitutional and procedural framework .

Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal in his response referred to Article 217 of the Constitution which requires a judge to vacate her present office on elevation or transfer.

"The transfer of Smt. Justice J. Nisha Banu, Judge, Madras High Court to be a Judge of the Kerala High Court was notified on 14.10.2025. Article 217 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India states that “the office of a Judge shall be vacated by his being appointed by the President to be a Judge of the Supreme Court or by his being transferred by the President to any other High Court within the territory of India," the response said.

The minister also said that appointments of judges to the High Courts are made under Articles 217 and 224 of the Constitution, in accordance with the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) framed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s judgments in the Second and Third Judges cases.

Under the MoP, recommendations for appointment of High Court judges are made by the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court after consultation with at least two of the senior most judges.

On the process governing transfers, the government stated that Article 222 of the Constitution empowers the President to transfer a High Court judge after consultation with the Chief Justice of India. As per the MoP, proposals for transfer are initiated by the Chief Justice of India in consultation with the four senior most puisne judges of the Supreme Court, and the opinion of the Chief Justice of India is determinative.

The reply added that the Chief Justice of India is expected to take into account the views of the Chief Justices of both the parent High Court and the transferee High Court, as well as personal factors relating to the concerned judge, including their response to the proposal and preferences of place. Transfers are made in public interest to promote better administration of justice.

[Read Response]