The Central Government has officially stepped in to ensure the Chhattisgarh High Court is not left without a leader. On September 4, 2026, the Union Law Ministry issued a notification appointing Justice Sanjay Kumar Agrawal to perform the duties of the Chief Justice of the state’s High Court.
This transition happened because the outgoing Chief Justice, Justice Ramesh Sinha, retired on the exact same day. Whenever a high judicial office becomes vacant, the law has a backup plan ready to ensure the courts keep running.
But this appointment is more than just a routine transfer. It happens against the backdrop of a larger judicial controversy brewing in another state. Let us break down what this notification means, the constitutional laws behind it, and the ongoing drama in the Rajasthan High Court.
The Official Notification: A Change Of Guard
High Courts are the highest judicial bodies in a state. They cannot function effectively without a Chief Justice, who handles both court cases and the administration of the entire state’s judiciary.
To prevent any gap in leadership, the President of India issued a notification under the Constitution. The official order stated that Justice Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, a sitting judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court, will now perform the duties of the Chief Justice.
This is a temporary arrangement. It ensures that the daily operations of the court, the assigning of cases, and administrative decisions do not stop just because the permanent Chief Justice has retired.
What The Law Says: Article 223 Explained
The Indian Constitution has specific rules for how the judiciary operates. The appointment of an acting head for a High Court is governed by Article 223 of the Constitution of India.
Article 223 deals with the appointment of an Acting Chief Justice. It states that when the office of the Chief Justice of a High Court is vacant, the duties of the office shall be performed by one of the other judges of the court.
This vacancy can happen for three main reasons:
- The current Chief Justice retires or passes away.
- The Chief Justice is temporarily absent due to health or other reasons.
- The Chief Justice is unable to perform their duties.
In such situations, the President of India steps in. The President appoints another judge from the same High Court—usually the senior-most judge—to take over. In the eyes of the law, the judge appointed under Article 223 has all the powers of a regular Chief Justice until a permanent appointment is made.
The Rajasthan High Court Connection
While Justice Agrawal is taking charge in Chhattisgarh, his name is also at the center of a major judicial shift involving the Rajasthan High Court. The Supreme Court Collegium recently recommended him to become the regular Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court.
The Supreme Court Collegium is a group of the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, led by the Chief Justice of India. They are responsible for recommending the appointment and transfer of High Court and Supreme Court judges to the Central Government.
The recommendation to send Justice Agrawal to Rajasthan comes at a highly sensitive time. The Rajasthan High Court is currently facing internal controversies and protests from the legal community.
Controversy And Protests In Rajasthan
Right now, the Rajasthan High Court is being led by an Acting Chief Justice, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. However, this temporary arrangement has sparked serious issues within the legal fraternity.
According to reports, Supreme Court Judge Justice Sandeep Mehta raised serious complaints against Acting Chief Justice Sharma. These complaints were formally communicated in letters sent directly to the Chief Justice of India.
The unrest has spilled out of the judges’ chambers and into the courtrooms. The lawyers of the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association decided to abstain from work. They launched a strike lasting until September 5, demanding that the Central Government immediately appoint a regular, permanent Chief Justice instead of relying on an acting one.
This is exactly why the Supreme Court Collegium recommended Justice Agrawal for the permanent role in Rajasthan. Until the Central Government clears that specific recommendation, Justice Agrawal will serve as the acting head in Chhattisgarh.
Why Does A High Court Need A Regular Chief Justice?
You might wonder why lawyers are protesting for a “regular” Chief Justice when an “acting” one has the same powers under Article 223. The answer lies in how courts are managed on a day-to-day basis.
The Chief Justice is known as the “Master of the Roster.” This means they have the absolute power to decide which judge hears which case. They also handle the transfers of lower court judges, manage the budget, and oversee the infrastructure of district courts across the state.
While an Acting Chief Justice has these powers legally, they usually avoid making massive, long-term administrative changes out of respect for the incoming permanent Chief Justice. Because of this, important administrative work can slow down if a court relies on an acting head for too long.
A regular Chief Justice brings stability. They can implement long-term visions, clear case backlogs, and ensure the state’s judicial machinery runs smoothly without hesitation.
What Happens Next?
For now, the Chhattisgarh High Court will function under the leadership of Justice Sanjay Kumar Agrawal. He will handle the roster, listen to important cases, and manage the state’s legal administration.
However, everyone in the legal community is watching the Central Government’s next move. If the Centre officially accepts the Supreme Court Collegium’s recommendation, Justice Agrawal will be transferred to Rajasthan.
If that happens, he will take oath as the permanent Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, which could finally put an end to the lawyers’ strike and the ongoing controversy in that state. Once he leaves, the President will have to appoint a new leader for the Chhattisgarh High Court.
Why This Matters For You
For the everyday citizen, the internal transfers of judges might seem like complex bureaucratic paperwork. But it directly affects how quickly you get justice.
When a High Court has stable leadership, cases move faster. District courts get better infrastructure. The entire legal system of the state becomes more efficient. Article 223 is a vital constitutional tool that ensures the doors of justice never close, even for a single day, just because a judge retires.
The Bottom Line
The Indian Constitution is designed to prevent a vacuum in power. By appointing Justice Sanjay Kumar Agrawal to perform the duties of the Chief Justice in Chhattisgarh, the law ensures the courts keep running smoothly while larger judicial appointments are sorted out.
Story reported by Supreme Court – High Court – Legal Breaking News | Live Law India. This article is BareLaw’s independent explanation and analysis.
📲 Get every BareLaw story on Telegram — simple legal news, 5 times a day, free: t.me/barelaw
