What is the issue?
- The government recently sent back the SC collegium's recommendation on judges appointment.
- It has raised concerns on the propriety of the Centre to hold back names from the collegium’s list.
What is the ongoing tussle?
- The SC collegium recommended a list of names to be elevated as Judges of SC.
- Justice K.M. Joseph and senior advocate Indu Malhotra were recommended together.
- Justice K M Joseph is currently the Chief Justice of Uttarakhand High Court.
- The government however approved only Indu Malhotra’s name.
- It however returned Justice K.M. Joseph’s name for reconsideration.
- This too was done more than 3 months after the Collegium had approved them.
- The collegium recently decided to reiterate its recommendation to elevate Justice K M Joseph as SC judge.
- When reiterated unanimously, the Centre is bound to act on the collegium resolution.
- This is as per the law laid down by the SC in the Third Judges Case of 1998.
What are the concerns?
- Power - The government’s decision to send back the collegium’s recommendation was unprecedented.
- It is suspected to have been influenced by some political considerations. Click here to know more.
- The executive power of the Centre holding back names from the collegium’s list needs a reassessment.
- Seniority - The Centre has selectively approved some names from a batch of recommendations.
- It could make a difference to the seniority of the judges concerned.
- Notably, seniority is the sole consideration for appointment of the Chief Justice as well as membership of the collegium.
- Delay - Justice K M Joseph's name would only be part of the collegium's next set of recommendations.
- This would include proposals to elevate the Chief Justices of some more high courts.
- The collegium seems to address the Centre's concern on fair representation to all high courts.
- However, it remains a concern why collegium did not send its reiteration to the Centre immediately.
What lies ahead?
- The unanimous reiteration of the collegium may end the current controversy.
- However, the larger issue of differences between the judiciary and the executive needs attention.
- In a judge-recommended system of appointments differences over particular candidates cannot be avoided.
- But it should be possible for the two sides to minimise these differences and act expeditiously.
- The onus is more on the government of the day.
- It should resist from blocking the appointment of anyone whom the judges themselves have found fit and deserving.
- The present consultative process in appointments should not be hampered by executive stubbornness.
Source: The Hindu, Indian Express
