‘Most transparent institution’: SC reserves order on collegium plea
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said it is the “most transparent institution”, and disapproved of adverse comments made by its former judges against the collegium system of appointing judges, terming it a “fashion”, comments that are significant given the backdrop of recent exchanges between the executive and the judiciary on the selection system.
“Let the system which is functioning not be derailed,” said a bench of justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar, reserving judgment on a plea demanding information about a 2018 collegium meeting.
While the petitioner’s lawyer Prashant Bhushan argued that the Supreme Court was not being transparent by not disclosing details of the December 12, 2018 collegium meeting in which the “decision” to elevate two high court judges to the top court were reportedly taken, the bench was emphatic the recommendation was not a “decision in writing”.
“Collegium does not function at the wishes of a busybody...it must have been an oral thing. The decision must not have been converted into writing. So many things are discussed in the collegium...we are the most transparent institution,” retorted justice Shah, who is also currently a member of the five-judge collegium in the top court
The bench’s comments come in the context of Union law minister Kiren Rijiju’s relentless criticism of the system, which he has over the last one month, at different instances, described as “opaque”, “alien to the Constitution” and the only system in the world where judges appoint people who are known to them.
While Rijiju’s comments were tacitly responded to by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud by making an appeal for “constitutional statesmanship” by the executive and judiciary as he spoke at the Constitugium,
tion Day function on November 25, a bench led by justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul disapproved of Rijiju’s stance during a hearing on November 28, and underlined that the Centre is bound to “observe the law of the land” and cannot “frustrate the entire system” of making judicial appointments because it doesn’t like it.
A day after the court’s tirade, the government appointed two new judges in the Bombay high court, but only after having returned 19 older recommendations, including 10 names that had been reiterated by the colle
on November 25.
Justice Kaul’s bench will take up the matter relating to the delay on the part of the government in clearing names again on December 8.
Meanwhile, appearing for RTI activist and petitioner Anjali Bhardwaj before the court on Friday, Bhushan cited statements and press reports quoting former Supreme Court judge Madan B Lokur. At a public event in January 2019, the former judge said the collegium resolution was not uploaded on the Supreme Court website despite a decision taken in the meeting on December 12, 2018 to elevate justice Pradeep Nandrajog, the then chief justice of the Rajasthan high court, and justice Rajendra Menon, the then chief Justice of the Delhi high court, as judges to the top court.
According to the reports, justice Lokur, who retired on December 30, 2018 and reportedly took part in the collegium meeting that approved the names of the two high court chief justices, said he was “disappointed” that the decision taken by the collegium on December 12, 2018 was not “followed and put out.”
However, the bench on Friday was dismissive of remarks made on the collegium by former Supreme Court judges, especially those who were a part of the collegium during their tenure and participated in the decision-making.
“We don’t want to comment on anything said by former members. Nowadays, it has become fashion(able) for former members to comment upon the decision when they were part of the collegium,” remarked the bench.
Bhardwaj approached the Supreme Court against denial of information by the Supreme Court administration regarding the agenda and other pertinent information about the December 2018 collegium meeting.
Her appeals before the Central Information Commission and the Delhi high court also failed to elicit any positive response.