Supreme Court Orders Coal Scam Judge Replacement Amid Delhi HC Request

The coal scam cases stem from alleged irregularities in coal block allocations during 2004-2009, which led to massive losses to the exchequer. These cases involve high-profile accused including politicians, bureaucrats, and corporate figures. The appointment of a dedicated judge was meant to expedite these important cases. However, the Delhi High Court's request to replace this judge—and the Supreme Court's acceptance of it—raises significant concerns about judicial autonomy and the reasons behind such decisions.

Key facts: The replaced judge had been handling coal scam litigation for only 6 months. The Delhi High Court made an "unusual request" for replacement, per Supreme Court records. Coal scam cases involve allegations spanning 2004-2009. Multiple high-profile accused are awaiting trial decisions. This is the first documented instance of such a replacement at this level in recent judicial history.

For exam purposes: This raises critical questions on judicial independence, separation of powers, and the Supreme Court's authority to override lower court decisions. UPSC candidates should understand the constitutional implications—Article 142 (SC's extraordinary powers), judicial autonomy under Articles 50 and 142, and whether institutional pressure can influence judicial appointments. This tests knowledge of constitutional law and governance structures.