NEW DELHI: In a swift decision, Centre on Saturday cleared the Supreme Court collegium’s recommendations and appointed chief justices for eight high courts, just a day after SC sought explanation from it for the delay in appointments. Significantly, it also appointed chief justice of Jharkhand HC, for which the state had moved a contempt plea against the Centre in SC .President has signed the warrants of appointment for the chief justices of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Madras, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh and Jharkhand.
Govt’s quick decision would perhaps ensure that differences between executive and judiciary on the issue of appointments in the higher judiciary do not snowball into tug-of-war as witnessed in judicial proceedings last year when SC expressed its deep displeasure over the Centre not adhering to the law. It had said the collegium system for appointment of judges was the law of the land and the Centre was bound to follow it and in case of reiteration, govt has no option but to accept the collegium’s decision.
Govt has appointed acting chief justice of Delhi HC Justice Manmohan as its chief justice. Delhi HC judge Justice Rajiv Shakdher has been appointed as chief justice of Himachal Pradesh HC. Another Delhi HC judge, Justice Suresh Kait will take charge as chief justice of Madhya Pradesh HC. Calcutta HC judge Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji has been appointed chief justice of Meghalaya HC. Bombay HC judge, Justice Nitin Madhukar Jamdar will move to Kerala HC as its chief justice. Acting chief justice of J&K and Ladakh HC, Justice Tashi Rabstan has been appointed as chief justice of the same HC. Bombay HC judge, Justice Shriram Kalpathi Rajendran has been appointed as chief justice of Madras HC and chief justice of Himachal Pradesh HC, Justice M S Ramachandran Rao has been transferred to Jharkhand HC
SC on Friday asked the govt to explain why some of the names recommended for judgeship are pending and at which level. Some of the issues raised by SC last year also remain unaddressed including the transfer of some HC judges and clearing those names which were reiterated by the SC collegium for HC judgeship. The delay and the Centre’s policy of “pick and choose” from the collegium’s recommendation is also a bone of contention between the two organs of governance and the court in its judicial proceedings repeatedly flagged the issue.
SC had in 2021 framed comprehensive guidelines for time-bound appointment of judges and fixed the time period for all authorities involved in the process to take decision. It had said the Intelligence Bureau (IB) should submit its report/inputs within 4-6 weeks from the date of recommendation of HC collegium to the Centre, which should forward the file to SC within 8-12 weeks from the date of receipt of views from the state and IB report. The CJI , thereafter, would send recommendations/advice to the law minister within four weeks. The Centre would make the appointment immediately or it can send the recommendation back for reconsideration and if the names are reiterated then they should be appointed within 3-4 weeks.
The apex court had last reiterated that govt could bring-in a new system by passing law but had said that “no system can be perfect”. It had said the present situation of delay in appointment was not healthy and it discouraged meritorious lawyers from accepting judgeship.
Govt’s quick decision would perhaps ensure that differences between executive and judiciary on the issue of appointments in the higher judiciary do not snowball into tug-of-war as witnessed in judicial proceedings last year when SC expressed its deep displeasure over the Centre not adhering to the law. It had said the collegium system for appointment of judges was the law of the land and the Centre was bound to follow it and in case of reiteration, govt has no option but to accept the collegium’s decision.
Govt has appointed acting chief justice of Delhi HC Justice Manmohan as its chief justice. Delhi HC judge Justice Rajiv Shakdher has been appointed as chief justice of Himachal Pradesh HC. Another Delhi HC judge, Justice Suresh Kait will take charge as chief justice of Madhya Pradesh HC. Calcutta HC judge Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji has been appointed chief justice of Meghalaya HC. Bombay HC judge, Justice Nitin Madhukar Jamdar will move to Kerala HC as its chief justice. Acting chief justice of J&K and Ladakh HC, Justice Tashi Rabstan has been appointed as chief justice of the same HC. Bombay HC judge, Justice Shriram Kalpathi Rajendran has been appointed as chief justice of Madras HC and chief justice of Himachal Pradesh HC, Justice M S Ramachandran Rao has been transferred to Jharkhand HC
SC on Friday asked the govt to explain why some of the names recommended for judgeship are pending and at which level. Some of the issues raised by SC last year also remain unaddressed including the transfer of some HC judges and clearing those names which were reiterated by the SC collegium for HC judgeship. The delay and the Centre’s policy of “pick and choose” from the collegium’s recommendation is also a bone of contention between the two organs of governance and the court in its judicial proceedings repeatedly flagged the issue.
SC had in 2021 framed comprehensive guidelines for time-bound appointment of judges and fixed the time period for all authorities involved in the process to take decision. It had said the Intelligence Bureau (IB) should submit its report/inputs within 4-6 weeks from the date of recommendation of HC collegium to the Centre, which should forward the file to SC within 8-12 weeks from the date of receipt of views from the state and IB report. The CJI , thereafter, would send recommendations/advice to the law minister within four weeks. The Centre would make the appointment immediately or it can send the recommendation back for reconsideration and if the names are reiterated then they should be appointed within 3-4 weeks.
The apex court had last reiterated that govt could bring-in a new system by passing law but had said that “no system can be perfect”. It had said the present situation of delay in appointment was not healthy and it discouraged meritorious lawyers from accepting judgeship.
