Hindustan Times (Chandigarh)

Centre not to be blamed for delay: CJI on hiring of judges

PETITION Gogoi says if at all there is a delay, it is on the part of the Supreme Court collegium

- Bhadra Sinha

THESE OBSERVATIO­NS ASSUME SIGNIFICAN­CE AS THE JUDICIARY HAS GENERALLY BLAMED THE GOVERNMENT FOR DRAGGING ITS FEET ON FRESH APPOINTMEN­TS TO HIGH COURTS

NEWDELHI: The government came in for some kind words from Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi on Friday over the appointmen­t of judges to the higher judiciary.

“If at all there was a delay, it was on the part of the collegium, and not the Union of India,” Gogoi said, hearing a petition by the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), a non-government organisati­on (NGO).

The three-member collegium that appoints high court judges is headed by the CJI.

Disagreein­g with the contention of CPIL that the government had been sitting on recommenda­tions made by the collegium to appoint high court judges, the CJI, on a bench with justice Sanjiv Khanna, observed: “How can you say that? Appointmen­t are happening, some of the names are pending with the collegium. As the Chief Justice, I am telling you that whatever is pending is mostly before the collegium. There are almost 70-80 proposals pending before the Supreme Court collegium and hardly 27 before the government.”

These observatio­ns assume significan­ce in the backdrop of the fact that the judiciary has generally blamed the government for dragging its feet on fresh appointmen­ts to high courts. Two years ago, then CJI TS Thakur had broken down, requesting the government to clear proposals for judicial appointmen­ts to high courts – where 434 posts against the sanctioned strength of 1,056 still remained vacant – on a war footing. According to the figures of the law ministry, as on Feburary 1, 2019, the vacancies in high courts stood at 400 posts against a sanctioned strength of 1,079.

CPIL, in its petition, argued that the Centre was blocking the process of appointmen­t and sought suitable directions to the government to comply with the recommenda­tions made since 2016.

During the hearing, when CPIL’S Prashant Bhushan insisted, the CJI said: “We don’t want to say anything more right now.” He said appointmen­ts were taking place regularly and posted the matter for a hearing after six weeks.

Filed in 2018, CPIL’S petition alleges that the Centre has deliberate­ly held up appointmen­t of judges despite the fact that recommenda­tions made by the collegium are binding on the government.

Various constituti­on bench judgments – of 1993, 1998 and the 2016 National Judicial Appointmen­ts Commission (NJAC) case – have been cited in the petition to assert that the collegium and CJI are supreme when it comes to appointmen­t and transfer of judges.

Despite binding judicial directions, the Centre, it said, continues to sit over files and this reflects a “virtual breakdown of the consultati­ve process, thereby diminishin­g, if not destroying the primacy of the Chief Justice of India.”

“The picture that emerges reflects an extremely sorry state of affairs with regard to appointmen­ts and transfers of Judges to the higher Judiciary thereby seriously eroding the Independen­ce of the Judiciary and violating the Basic Structure of the Constituti­on,” the NGO has said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India