Government sending again names reiterated by Collegium matter of concern: Supreme Court

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court mentioned on Friday it’s a “matter of concern” that the federal government is sending again the names reiterated by the Collegium for judgeship in constitutional courts regardless of there being nothing within the current situation to forestall the appointment submit reiteration.

A bench of Justices S Ok Kaul and A S Oka noticed that nothing prevents the legislature from bringing in a greater system for appointment of judges to constitutional courts however until the time the legislation holds it should be applied.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, showing for one of many petitioners, mentioned even the names reiterated by the Collegium have been despatched again by the federal government “That is a matter of concern. We have already flagged it in the last order,” mentioned the bench, which was listening to a matter associated to the alleged delay by the Centre in clearing the names beneficial by the Collegium for appointment as judges to the Supreme Court and excessive courts.

It mentioned the federal government could have its personal views when a advice is made however it may well’t be stored on maintain with out sending again the feedback on it. “What is to be done is that comments can be sent to us. We will look into the comments, see whether we want to reiterate it or drop the name. If we reiterate the name, then there is, as per the present scenario, nothing which can prevent the appointment,” it mentioned.

The bench mentioned each system has its positives and negatives and neither anybody is saying that there’s a good system nor can there be an ideal system.

Justice Kaul noticed the grave concern is, “Are we creating an environment where meritorious people have hesitancy in giving their consent (for judgeship)? It is happening.”

The bench mentioned the delay in clearing the names deter folks from giving consent.

WEB SCRAWL | In protection of the collegium

When the bench requested Attorney General R Venkataramani in regards to the 5 names beneficial by the collegium final month for elevation as judges of the apex court docket, he requested the court docket to defer it, saying he’s trying into the matter.

“This should not take time. They are already existing chief justices and senior judges,” Justice Kaul mentioned.

The bench additionally noticed, “If you look at the statements made in the parliament and otherwise, the court itself at times has considered the view of the government and dropped names. That has also happened.”

The high court docket mentioned it’s not that each identify beneficial by the excessive court docket’s Collegium goes by and this exhibits the scrutiny.

It mentioned there are folks with completely different factors of view and a court docket should replicate completely different philosophy and course of views.

“I do believe when you join as a judge, you are here to do a job and trained yourself to do a job independently, dehors (other than, not including or outside the scope of) whatever may have been your political affiliations, what may have been the thought processes,” Justice Kaul mentioned.

He mentioned there’s a spectrum of thought course of in appointment of judges and if an individual has his or her personal thought course of, it doesn’t imply she or he is aligned by some means. “Integrity of course is the first qualification,” the bench mentioned.

OPINION | Reform the court docket whereas defending it

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who additionally appeared within the matter, raised the problem of seniority of an individual whose identify has been beneficial.

“We have had examples where seniority has been disturbed. Now a negative impact of that is that the collegiums will be very hesitant in sending the second list,” the bench mentioned.

On the problem raised by Bhushan that names reiterated by the Collegium have been despatched again, the bench mentioned the federal government within the final lot had returned some names which have been pending.

The apex court docket mentioned among the names despatched again by the federal government have been reiterated by the Collegium and a few are these which the Collegium didn’t clear however the authorities in its knowledge felt they should be thought-about.

The bench has posted the matter for additional listening to on February 3.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court mentioned on Friday it’s a “matter of concern” that the federal government is sending again the names reiterated by the Collegium for judgeship in constitutional courts regardless of there being nothing within the current situation to forestall the appointment submit reiteration.

A bench of Justices S Ok Kaul and A S Oka noticed that nothing prevents the legislature from bringing in a greater system for appointment of judges to constitutional courts however until the time the legislation holds it should be applied.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, showing for one of many petitioners, mentioned even the names reiterated by the Collegium have been despatched again by the federal government “That is a matter of concern. We have already flagged it in the last order,” mentioned the bench, which was listening to a matter associated to the alleged delay by the Centre in clearing the names beneficial by the Collegium for appointment as judges to the Supreme Court and excessive courts.

It mentioned the federal government could have its personal views when a advice is made however it may well’t be stored on maintain with out sending again the feedback on it. “What is to be done is that comments can be sent to us. We will look into the comments, see whether we want to reiterate it or drop the name. If we reiterate the name, then there is, as per the present scenario, nothing which can prevent the appointment,” it mentioned.

The bench mentioned each system has its positives and negatives and neither anybody is saying that there’s a good system nor can there be an ideal system.

Justice Kaul noticed the grave concern is, “Are we creating an environment where meritorious people have hesitancy in giving their consent (for judgeship)? It is happening.”

The bench mentioned the delay in clearing the names deter folks from giving consent.

WEB SCRAWL | In protection of the collegium

When the bench requested Attorney General R Venkataramani in regards to the 5 names beneficial by the collegium final month for elevation as judges of the apex court docket, he requested the court docket to defer it, saying he’s trying into the matter.

“This should not take time. They are already existing chief justices and senior judges,” Justice Kaul mentioned.

The bench additionally noticed, “If you look at the statements made in the parliament and otherwise, the court itself at times has considered the view of the government and dropped names. That has also happened.”

The high court docket mentioned it’s not that each identify beneficial by the excessive court docket’s Collegium goes by and this exhibits the scrutiny.

It mentioned there are folks with completely different factors of view and a court docket should replicate completely different philosophy and course of views.

“I do believe when you join as a judge, you are here to do a job and trained yourself to do a job independently, dehors (other than, not including or outside the scope of) whatever may have been your political affiliations, what may have been the thought processes,” Justice Kaul mentioned.

He mentioned there’s a spectrum of thought course of in appointment of judges and if an individual has his or her personal thought course of, it doesn’t imply she or he is aligned by some means. “Integrity of course is the first qualification,” the bench mentioned.

OPINION | Reform the court docket whereas defending it

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who additionally appeared within the matter, raised the problem of seniority of an individual whose identify has been beneficial.

“We have had examples where seniority has been disturbed. Now a negative impact of that is that the collegiums will be very hesitant in sending the second list,” the bench mentioned.

On the problem raised by Bhushan that names reiterated by the Collegium have been despatched again, the bench mentioned the federal government within the final lot had returned some names which have been pending.

The apex court docket mentioned among the names despatched again by the federal government have been reiterated by the Collegium and a few are these which the Collegium didn’t clear however the authorities in its knowledge felt they should be thought-about.

The bench has posted the matter for additional listening to on February 3.