Judges’ Appointment: Centre ‘suddenly’ forwards 70 pending proposals to Collegium

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, October 9

After sitting over the recommendations made by collegiums of various high courts for appointment of judges for 11 months, the Centre has “suddenly” forwarded all 70 pending proposals to the CJI-led top court Collegium in the last few days, the Supreme Court said on Monday.

“Seventy names pending before the Ministry (of Law and Justice) starting from November 2022 have now suddenly landed before the Collegium…From tomorrow onwards, we will be starting processing the names because we can’t suddenly process 70 names on one fine day because the consultee judges’ views have to be taken… We will try to finish it before the October vacation,” a Bench led by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul said.

Attorney General R Venkataramani told the Bench that Delhi High Court judge Siddharth Mridul’s appointment as Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court will be notified soon. The Supreme Collegium led by CJI DY Chandrachud had recommended his name for appointment as the Chief Justice of the Manipur high Court on July 5 this year, saying he was “fit and suitable in all respects for being appointed…”

“Appointment of chief justice to the high court of a sensitive state has finally received their attention and they are doing it now,” Justice Kail commented.

Transfer files of 14 high court judges have also been cleared and the remaining 12 were under process, Venkataramani told the Bench, adding five of the 19 names — either proposed for the first time or reiterated by the Supreme Court — had been cleared.

Terming it a “positive development”, Justice Kaul complimented Attorney General R Venkataramani at the very outset of the proceedings. However, it said it would not be correct to say that the recommendations were pending with the Collegium as they had been received only in the last few days.

“Since you’re normally on the receiving end, some compliments for what has been done (by the Government)… I compliment the Attorney-General first, because names have been sent to us,” Justice Kaul told Venkataramani.

The Bench, however, wondered, “Why does it require the court’s intervention to get things moving?”

Posting the matter for further hearing on October 20, Justice Kaul said he would take up the matter at least four-five times before demitting office on December 25.

While hearing a petition filed by the Advocates’ Association, Bengaluru alleging “wilful disobedience” of the time frame laid down to facilitate timely appointment of judges in its April 20, 2021 order, the Supreme Court had on September 26 pointed fingers at the Centre for sitting over 70 recommendations for appointment and transfer of high court judges.

As senior counsel Arvind Datar and advocate Prashant Bhushan suggested on behalf of the petitioners that if the Centre continued to sit over names reiterated by the Supreme Court Collegium, the appointment in question should be “deemed to be appointed”, the Bench said they cannot be “deemed to be appointed” as judges to constitutional courts were appointed under a warrant of appointment issued by the President.