Over 2,000 advocates demand urgent judge appointments, end to ‘judge-son’ nexus

In a sweeping call for systemic overhaul in judicial appointments, more than 2,000 advocates have backed a requisition seeking the immediate filling up of approximately 283 vacant high court judges’ posts, including 35 (now 26 after oath of 10 judges on August 4) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, warning that judicial delays, institutional favouritism, and in-breeding are threatening the credibility and independence of the higher judiciary.

Pointing to over 62 lakh cases pending before high courts across India, the signatories have asserted that the backlog could be wiped out in about four years, provided the vacancies are filled by “honest, hardworking and dedicated” judges capable of deciding 25 cases a day, with 240 working days annually. The requisition calls for the elevation process to begin at least six months in advance of anticipated vacancies, instead of waiting “till close relatives of judges or the Union Law Minister become eligible.”

The four-page requisition warns against the ‘judge-son/relative nexus’ and calls for a complete ban on in-breeding in judicial appointments, recommending that judges should not be elevated from the same Bar to the same high court to prevent conflicts of interest arising out of past professional ties. It advocates a transparent and transferable judicial system, akin to the Indian Administrative and Police Services, where officers cannot serve in their home districts.

The document was initiated by senior advocate Tahar Singh, who, along with advocate Sarbjeet Singh, has collected over 2,000 signatures from members of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar. It asserts that more than 100 eligible and experienced advocates are willing to take an oath and file affidavits for out-of-state appointments, underscoring that merit-based selections can be made without delay.

It also demands the implementation of a five-year transfer policy for high court judges and retrospective investigations into the accumulation of disproportionate assets, even post-retirement. Citing recent scandals involving Justice Yashwant Verma, Justice Narayan Shukla, and the cash-for-bail racket at Rouse Avenue Court, the requisition warns that corruption in the judiciary is at an “all-time high” and urgently needs to be stemmed to restore public trust.

Raising concerns over the opaque functioning of the collegium system, it urges that members of collegiums must recuse themselves if any of their relatives are practicing in the same high court, stating: “If any relative of a collegium member is practicing in the same court, the member should recuse himself on ethical and moral grounds.”

Additional proposals include: Raising the minimum age for elevation to the high court to 50 years, and the designation of senior advocates to 45 years, to ensure adequate maturity and detachment; elevation of only those “known for their honesty and unbiased conduct”, particularly by the collegium of the Punjab and Haryana High Court; and establishment of clear guidelines for collegium selections, to replace the prevailing ad hoc and discretionary system.

The requisition also praises retired Supreme Court judges, including Justice Kurien Joseph, Justice Chelameswar, Justice Madan B Lokur, Justice Sanjeev Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, and Justice Abhay S Oka for declining post-retirement government appointments, and calls upon all sitting judges — from Justice Surya Kant onwards in seniority — to follow their example and thus uphold the independence of the judiciary.

The requisition ends with an appeal to the Chief Justice of India and fellow judges of the apex court to take moral and institutional responsibility for implementing these reforms, noting that all suggestions fall squarely within their jurisdiction. “When the history of India’s judicial system will be read, the names of you and your colleagues will be remembered,” it reads, drawing a parallel with former CJI MN Venkatachaliah, who introduced the transfer policy in 1993.