Explanation:

? Article 224A of the Constitution provides for the appointment of ad hoc judges in the High Courts based on their consent. It allows the Chief Justice of a High Court to appoint a person who has been a judge earlier to sit as a judge of the court with the previous consent of the President. This has only been invoked thrice in the past and has more or less stayed dormant for years. Hence, statement 1 is correct.
? Recently, the Supreme Court has decided to invoke this “dormant provision” in the Constitution to clear the way for the appointment of retired judges as ad hoc judges to clear the mounting arrears in the various High Courts.
? As the provision has been utilised only sparingly in the past, and for the limited purpose of disposing of particular kinds of cases, the
endeavor to appoint ad hoc judges will have to come with some guidelines.
? The Court has made a beginning by directing that the trigger point for such an appointment will be when the vacancies go beyond 20% of the sanctioned strength, or when more than 10% of the backlog of pending cases are over five years old; when cases in a particular category are pending for over five years, or when the rate of disposal is slower than the rate of the institution of fresh cases. Hence, statement 3 is not correct.
? The Bench has ruled that the current Memorandum of Procedure be also followed for appointing ad hoc judges, a process initiated by the Chief Justice of a High Court, with a suggested tenure of two to three years. Hence, statement 2 is not correct.