SC to monitor govt action on collegium’s judge picks

NEW DELHI Expressing anguish over delays by the Union government in appointing judges, the Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to monitor the steps taken by the Centre in processing the recommendations made by the collegium for appointing and transferring judges.

“We will monitor this after every 10-12 days. In several cases, even the basic processing has not been done. At least your views should come before the collegium for its consideration,” a bench, led by justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, told attorney general R Venkataramani.

While the A-G asked for a week to come back with the latest status of the recommendations made by the collegium to the government, the bench pointed out that there has been a hiatus of seven months, during which several proposals have remained pending.

“Only service names (names of judicial officers recommended for appointment as high court judges) are processed after the collegium recommends. Service names (names of lawyers) are not coming back at all,” the bench, which also comprised justice Sudhanshu Dhulia added as it heard a contempt plea complaining against delays by the Centre in appointing judges.

“We will now monitor it closely. Every 10-12 days, we will take up the matter... We thought of saying a lot but since the A-G is asking for one week, we are holding ourselves back. However, we may not be quiet on the next date if things don’t change,” cautioned the court.

The bench lamented that its recommendations since November 2022 are hanging fire, asking Venkataramani to come back with a solution on October 9 – the next date of hearing. Reading out from a chart, it stated that there are at least nine names of lawyers recommended for appointment as judges in various high courts pending with the government for over seven months.

“There are seven others whose names have been reiterated by the collegium, but the government is yet to say anything on them. And then there are 26 transfers (of judges from one high court to another) that are also pending. The appointment of a chief justice in a sensitive high court (Manipur) is also pending,” the bench flagged.

It told Venkataramani that the unexplained delay by the government forces several lawyers to withdraw their names. “We also have people from the bar declining to be recommended for judgeship. We also try to make available the best talent available in the high courts. The time frame under our judgement was approximately five months... We have endeavoured to push it. But we keep saying that this is not something we should be asked to push,” it added.

At the same time, the bench clarified that there would now be regular monitoring of the government’s action. By a judgment in April 2021, the court held that the government is obligated to revert to the collegium within 18 weeks if it has any reservation to a name proposed for judgeship.

During the brief hearing, senior counsel Arvind Datar and advocate Prashant Bhushan flagged the issues of some pending recommendations for appointment of high court chief justices, transfer of judges as well as a few names which the government was yet to appoint despite the collegium’s reiteration.

The contempt plea in the matter has been filed by Advocate Association, Bengaluru, through advocate Amit Pai, highlighting several instances of pending appointments and unexplained holdover by the government.

As reported by HT on July 27, the appointment of a full-time chief justice in the Manipur high court has been delayed with the N Biren Singh-government sitting over the Centre’s correspondence sent earlier that month.

On July 5, the Supreme Court collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, made recommendations for the appointments of chief justices in the high courts of Bombay, Gujarat, Manipur and Andhra Pradesh. The collegium also included justices Kaul and Sanjiv Khanna. The procedure required the Union government to obtain the views of the state government before notifying such appointments.

By making a set of recommendations in the first week of August, the Supreme Court collegium had recommended transfers of at least 24 high court judges for “better administration of justice”, signifying a massive shake-up in the higher judiciary. Many of these recommendations are yet to be notified.

Similarly, there have been seven names that have been reiterated by the collegium but are yet to be cleared by the Centre. These included appointments of advocates Saurabh Kirpal, R John Sathyan and Somasekhar Sundaresan as judges in the high courts of Delhi, Madras and Bombay, respectively, which have also been in limbo for more than 10 months each despite reiterations by the collegium.

The delay in notifying the transfers of judges was viewed seriously by the Supreme Court during its proceedings in January and February, when it took up the contempt plea. At that time, the bench took strong exception to the government sitting over almost a dozen recommendations pertaining to the transfer of high court judges, making it clear that “any delay in transfers may result in administrative and judicial actions which may not be palatable”. It added that lack of consistency in the time taken by the Centre to notify the recommendations was creating “issues of faith” between the judiciary and the executive.

The top court’s comments came at a time when the judiciary and the executive were locked in a tussle over judicial appointments. Then law minister Kiren Rijiju issued a series of statements criticising the manner in which the collegium functioned and questioning the division of powers between the two organs.

Between December and February, the top court, in a series of judicial proceedings, responded with reminders to the government that the collegium system is the law of the land that must be followed by the government “to a T”, while saying that the Centre had delayed a number of decisions without giving adequate reasons.

The hearing of the contempt plea on Tuesday were the first proceedings in the matter after Arjun Ram Meghwal took over as the Union minister of law and justice on May 18.