Entre rejects 14 collegium icks for HC appointments

The Union governt has declined to accept 14 es for appointment in the high ts as judges, asking the eme Court collegium to w its recommendations. The bers include the oldest recendation made by the colleback in July 2019. cording to people familiar the development, it has taken e than a year for the governt to decide on returning 10 of 14 names while two of them been sent back for the second even after the collegium reitd them. ose names returned for sideration earlier this month ded five names for appointt in the Calcutta high court h had been pending with the rnment since July 25, 2019, te the final recommendation e SC collegium. milarly, one name for the mu and Kashmir high court been pending for almost 21 ths while another one not pted by the government for ame court was forwarded in h this year after additional back for a reconsideration for the first time, the government has also opted to seek a review of two names for the second time. This, even though the memorandum of procedure (MOP), which guides the appointment of judges in the higher judiciary, makes it clear that the government is bound by the decision of the collegium after the names are reiterated.

The government has demanded reconsideration of two names meant for the Karnataka and Kerala high courts. Of the two names returned for the Karnataka high court, one was initially recommended in October 2019 and reiterated in March this year.

Similarly, despite the collegium’s reiteration of a name for the Kerala high court in March this year after rejecting all objections, the government has chosen strength. The high courts of Delhi, Allahabad, Calcutta, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Patna, Punjab and Haryana, Rajasthan and Telangana face shortage of more than one-third of their total judges’ strength.

The files have been sent back after attorney general KK Venugopal assured the top court in April that the government will take a decision on the oldest pending names within three months. Later in April, the Supreme Court had in a judgment set down 18 weeks as an outer time limit within which the Centre is expected to process the names for appointment of high court judges, besides notifying appointments once the names are reiterated by its collegium.

However, on August 9, citing huge vacancies of judges across the high courts in the country, the Supreme Court had come down heavily on the Union government for bringing the “third pillar of democracy to a standstill” by not appointing judges and warned that the government’s administration will also come to a standstill if this attitude continues.

“There is a huge paucity of judges but you are not interested... If the judicial system is sought to