The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI Photo
The Centre on Monday told the Supreme Court that it would shortly issue a notification for appointment of the Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court. It has also informed the apex court that it has cleared 70 other names for appointment as High Court judges.
While recording the positive development, a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, however, asked Attorney General R Venkataramani, representing the Centre, why it requires an intervention by the court to get the things moving.
"All names (candidates recommended as judges of various high courts) received by them up to end of June have been forwarded to the Collegium. They said all these names are pending before the Collegium….these names have come in the last two-three days, this week onwards we are in process of analysing the names…will do it in next two weeks,” the bench said.
On September 26, the apex court had expressed its concern over the pendency of 70 names (for the appointment of high court judges), which have been pending for a period of 10 months.
"Now, there is no overdue pendency of names and secondly, regarding the appointment of the Chief Justice of Manipur is concerned, the central government is shortly going to ensure notification, and for transfer of judges, they say they are implementing transfers," the bench said.
On July 5, the SC Collegium led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud recommended the appointment of Delhi High Court judge Justice Siddharth Mridul as the Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court.
The bench noted that from the original list of reiterated names and recommended names (of judges), the total comes to 19 (total reiterated names 10 and sent for the first time 9).
The AG said as far as Allahabad High Court is concerned, there are five names which have been sent back. Datar said for Kerala High Court, two candidates were recommended for judgeship first sent in 2019, and reiterated in November 2019, and now we are almost in November 2023. Datar said now after four years it should not take so long and raised issues regarding seniority of candidates recommended.
The AG said that the matter on those two names has come back to the SC Collegium and the high court has also sent some inputs.
The bench said that the problem arises (with the candidates for judgeship) when the government raises an objection and the apex court Collegium overrules them.
“There the government has a right to say you may have cleared it, we still has some reservation, so they send it back….when they come back and Collegium reiterates (the names)…..in some situation, a view has been prevailed and recommendation has been recalled or further inputs are sought. When a name has been reiterated then appointment must take place, you are right,” the bench told Datar, while referring to different situations.
The bench said the positive development is that almost 70 judges’ names pending with the ministry, starting from November 2022, have come before the apex court collegium.
With regard to reiterated names, Justice Kaul said, "There should not be too much of pick and choose as people lose seniority in the bargain….they may not accept it. Personally, I am finding it a challenge to persuade whom I think should be judges….to come on this side of the bench. It becomes a more Herculean task than before.”
Flagging the issue of delay in judges’ appointment, advocate Prashant Bhushan, said that after reiteration of names for judgeship, they should be deemed to have been appointed.
The bench asked Bhushan, how does a deemed appointment work? There is a warrant of appointment issued by the President of India, how can there be deemed appointment? Justice Kaul said, “the President does not sign the warrant, then what happens…there are complications…”.
The apex court, in its order, noted that regarding the issue of transfer of 26 judges of high courts — files in 14 cases — have been cleared and notification will be issued shortly, and in respect of remaining 12 cases, it is stated to be under process.
By the next date, Justice Kaul said, “I want this (12 pending names) to be done. Don't make me...I'm being very polite. Let me be polite”.
The court scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 20.