SC makes sharp remarks on delay in judges’ appointment
With 70 Collegium recommendations still stuck with the Government of India, the Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed its dismay over the long delays in the appointment of judges and asked the Attorney General to use his office to resolve the issue. After a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia raised the matter, AG R Venkataramani sought a week’s time to come back with instructions on the pending recommendations for judges’ appointment to the High Court.
“Today, I am quiet because the Attorney General has sought a very short time, next time I will not be quiet. Use your good office to see these issues are resolved,” Justice Kaul told Venkataramani during the hearing. The bench said, “There were 80 recommendations pending until last week when 10 names were cleared. Now, the figure is 70, of which 26 recommendations are of transfer of judges, seven are reiterations, nine are pending without being returned to the collegium and one case is of appointment of the Chief Justice to a sensitive High Court.” All these recommendations have been pending since November last year, it said. The government has not cleared the appointment of a Chief Justice in Manipur State, where huge ethnic violence is not yet settled.
Justice Kaul said there is a seven-month hiatus since something substantial was done on the recommendations which are pending and these needed basic processing only. “We have endeavoured to push things and monitor closely. I have told the attorney general that every 10-12 days this matter will be taken up, so that before I demit office (December 25), substantial work is done,” said Justice Kaul, who is part of the apex court collegium which looks after the appointment of judges in the top court and the High Courts.
The appointment of judges through the Collegium system has in the past become a major flashpoint between the Supreme Court and the Centre with the mechanism drawing criticism from different quarters. The top court was hearing a petition filed by Advocates Association of Bengaluru seeking contempt action against the Union Ministry of Law and Justice for not allegedly adhering to the timeline set by the court in a 2021 judgment.
During the hearing, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for another petitioner NGO Common Cause, submitted a chart related to pending recommendations with the government. He said what is more worrisome is that even after a batch of names is recommended by the collegium at one time, the government segregates it and makes selective appointments. “This affects the morale of lawyers and as per my information, several of them have withdrawn their consents,” he said.
Justice Kaul, while agreeing with the views of Bhushan, said there are nine such names, where the government has kept the names pending without reverting them back. “I agree that the way good candidates withdraw their consent to be a judge is really worrisome. We try to get the best talents but due to pendency, lawyers whose names have been recommended for judgeship have withdrawn their names,” Justice Kaul said as he posted the matter for further hearing on October 9.
Senior advocate Arvind Dattar, appearing for the petitioner ‘The Advocates Association of Bengaluru’ and Bhushan said a “hard push” is needed to ensure that the Centre adheres to the timeline. Justice Kaul said some of the candidates have lost interest and withdrawn their names due to the delay in appointment, which also affects their seniority.
“I know about one or two such great candidates due to the position I am holding. With the assurance from AG, I’ll take this matter up every 10 days. I thought of saying a lot, but since the attorney general is only seeking seven days’ time, I’m holding myself,” he said. Bhushan urged the bench that direction needs to be issued for compliance with its verdict in which a timeline has been fixed for clearing the recommendation of the Collegium. Earlier, the apex court had said the Government of India should appoint judges within three-four weeks if the Collegium reiterates its recommendations unanimously.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- Supreme Court rejects plea to tally all VVPAT slips with EVM votes; says ‘no going back to paper ballot’ - April 26, 2024
- US report citing human rights violations is deeply biased: India - April 25, 2024
- Kotak Mahindra Bank shares tank 13%. Market Cap erodes by Rs.37,721 cr post-RBI action - April 25, 2024
I also express my anguish & sadness & disappointment on Supreme Court in not giving its judgement for past 75 years.
Their voices will be heard by govt, when it finds time & energy to address it
But I do not have any time to wait for another 750 years to hear from Supreme Court.
Supreme court can run 24 x 7, but it says, it cannot for judges require summer + rainy + winter season holidays (Judgement can wait)
I also express my anguish & sadness & disappointment on Supreme Court in not giving its judgement for past 75 years.
Their voices will be heard by govt, when it finds time & energy to address it
But I do not have any time to wait for another 750 years to hear from Supreme Court.
Every action has a reaction, more so when the reasoning is not convincing and appears to be infringing on the basic sprit. Interpretations including those of the words in dictionary when done conveniently to suit a certain narrative is perceived as dishonest and not expected from a major pallor in democracy. It is only a matter of time before the reversal will come like the it was said that SAMAY KA CHAKRA HAI.