Centre to give SC ‘sensitive’ info delaying appointment of 7 CJs

Having said that some “sensitive material” was delaying forward movement on the Collegium’s July 11 recommendation for appointment of Chief Justices of seven high courts, the Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it would provide details about it next week.

Govt seeks week’s time

Advertisement

• The Centre on Thursday told the apex court that it will provide some details next week concerning the Collegium’s recommendations on appointment of Chief Justices in seven high courts
• Days after the Centre told the SC that it had “sensitive information”, the CJI-led Collegium on Tuesday had made changes in its earlier recommendations

“I will be providing some details about the Collegium’s recommendations. Please list it after a week,” Attorney General R Venkataramani told a Bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, seeking deferment of hearing on a PIL on judicial appointments filed by advocate Harsh Vibhore Singhal that was listed for hearing on Friday.

The Bench, which also included Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, said the submissions for the adjournment could be made on Friday as the matter was already on board.

As the CJI pointed out that the Jharkhand Government had filed a contempt petition against the Centre over the delay in the appointment of the Chief Justice in the state’s high court, Venkataramani said he was not aware of it.

The Jharkhand Government has moved the top court against the Centre for not clearing the recommendation made by the Collegium to appoint Justice MS Ramachandra Rao as the Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court. Justice Rao is currently the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

The Centre and the Supreme Court have been at loggerheads over judicial appointments with the latter accusing the former of sitting over the Collegium’s recommendations. However, during the current CJI’s tenure things have moved rather smoothly, barring a few exceptions.

Days after the Centre told the top court that “sensitive information” available with it was delaying the forward movement on the Collegium’s July 11 recommendation.