Tag: HC judges appointment

  • Govt yet to take call on 68 names sent by SC collegium for appointment as HC judges

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The government is yet to take a call on the recommendations made by the Supreme Court collegium on appointing a total of 68 judicial officers and advocates as judges of various high courts, sources aware of the procedure for appointment to the higher judiciary have said.

    Between August 8 and September 1 this year, the apex court collegium had processed over 100 names recommended by various high courts and had finally sent 68 names to the government for appointment as judges to 12 high courts.

    The government is yet to take a call on the names recommended by the SC collegium headed by Chief Justice of India N V Ramana, the sources said.

    Out of the 68 names, two from Karnataka and one from Jammu and Kashmir have been sent for a third time, while 10 others have been recommended for a second time.

    The rest are fresh recommendations.

    Prior to these recommendations, in a historic decision on August 17, the SC collegium had sent nine names, including three women, for elevation as judges of the Supreme Court.

    The names were cleared with significant pace by the government leading to their swearing-in as apex court judges on August 31.

    On Friday, the Supreme Court collegium is learnt to have recommended eight names of judges, including acting chief justice of Calcutta High Court Justice Rajesh Bindal, for their elevation as chief justices of different high courts.

    Besides, the marathon collegium meetings on Thursday and Friday have led to recommendations of transfer of five high court chief justices, including Tripura High Court Chief Justice Akil Kureshi, and 28 other high courts judges.

    The combined sanctioned strength of the 25 high courts of the country is 1,098 judges.

    As on September 1, there were 465 vacancies, according data put in public domain by the Law Ministry.

  • Appointment of HC judges is made after considering seniority, merit: SC

    Supreme Court said this while imposing a cost of Rs 5 lakh on an advocate for abusing the court proceedings by trying to stop the elevation of a judge.

  • HCs in ‘crisis situation’ with huge vacancies for judges: Supreme Court

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concern over the “crisis situation” in high courts which are grappling with 40-50 per cent vacancies and said the Centre should appoint judges within 3-4 weeks if the collegium reiterates its recommendations unanimously.

    Coming out with timelines to facilitate the process, a bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde said the Centre should proceed to make appointment immediately after the apex court collegium recommends the names and if the government has any reservations on the “suitability or in public interest”, it may send it back to the collegium with the specific reasons for reservation recorded.

    “If the Supreme Court collegium after consideration of the aforesaid inputs still reiterates the recommendation(s) unanimously (Cl.24.1), such appointment should be processed and appointment should be made within three to four weeks,” said the bench, also comprising Justices SK Kaul and Surya Kant.

    The bench said it would be “advisable” to follow the timelines, in addition to those mentioned in the Memorandum of Procedure as finalised by the collegium on March 10, 2017 where certain time frames have been stated for appointment of judges to the high courts.

    “The Intelligence Bureau (IB) should submit its report/inputs within four to six weeks from the date of recommendation of the high court collegium, to the Central Government,” it said.

    The bench said that it would be desirable that the Centre forward the files/recommendations to the apex court within eight to 12 weeks from the date of receipt of views from the state government and the report/input from the IB.

    “It would be for the government to thereafter proceed to make the appointment immediately on the aforesaid consideration and undoubtedly if government has any reservations on suitability or in public interest, within the same period of time it may be sent back to the Supreme Court collegium with the specific reasons for reservation recorded,” it said.

    “We are conscious that the aforesaid exercise is collaborative in nature and we would expect promptness in this process to facilitate the larger cause of dispensation of timely justice,” the bench said.

    The apex court noted in its order that Attorney General KK Venugopal had placed before it the appointment position in the high courts to contend that against the sanctioned strength of 1,080 judges, 664 judges have been appointed with vacancies of 416 judges. “However, the recommendations received and under process with the government are 196 leaving 220 recommendations to be received,” the bench noted.

    “The high courts are in a crisis situation. There are almost 40 per cent vacancies in the high courts, with many of the larger high courts working under 50 per cent of their sanctioned strength,” it said.

    The bench emphasised on the importance of the Chief Justices of high courts making recommendations in time. “The vacancies are known and the norms permit making recommendations up to six months in advance,” it said.

    However, the bench said that even recommendations for 220 existing vacancies appear not to have been made much less for vacancies which are going to arise in the next six months. “We, thus, once again, emphasise the requirement and desirability of the Chief Justices of the high courts, who will make endeavour to recommend vacancies as early as possible even if they are not made at one go,” it said.

    The top court added that even in earlier orders, it had noted the “apparent hesitation” of some high courts to recommend names when the earlier list is in the pipeline. “We have opined that there is no such impediment to initiate a new process without waiting for the result of the earlier recommendations,” it said.

    The bench noted that in the earlier proceedings, it had handed over to the Attorney General a chart of 45 names recommended from high courts which were still pending with the government for over six months.

    It, however, said the last couple of weeks has seen progress in this behalf and those names have reached the collegium. “The second was the list of old proposals in pipeline pending with the Government of India after the Supreme Court collegium recommendations numbering 10. These have been pending for considerable period of time. On the last date of hearing, the Attorney General had made a statement that a decision would be taken in this behalf within the next three months,” it said.

    The bench said six names reiterated by the collegium a second time, are also awaiting appointment.

    It said the Attorney General did not differ with the requirement of time bound schedule for filling the vacancies at every stage, though he emphasised that trigger for filling up of the vacancies is the recommendations made by the chief justices of high courts.

    “However, once the recommendations are made, there are two stages at which the matter rests with the Government – the first when the Ministry processes the names; and the second post the Collegium of the Supreme Court taking a call in recommending such of the names as are approved by the Collegium,” the bench said.

    “Insofar as the judiciary is concerned, the second stage after the recommendations are made by the collegium of the high courts is the time period taken by the collegium of the Supreme Court in consulting the consultee judge(s) to take a call on those name,” it said.

  • Will ensure social justice in appointing HC judges: Ravi Shankar Prasad to DMK MP P Wilson

    By Express News Service
    CHENNAI: Union Minister for Law and Justice Ravi Shankar Prasad said that the department will take steps to maintain social justice in future appointments of High Court judges. His response came following a letter written to him by DMK Rajya Sabha MP P Wilson over the lack of social justice in the appointments of judges.  

    Prasad wrote a letter to Wilson stating that the appointment of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are made under Articles 124, 217 and 224 of the Constitution of India, which do not provide for reservation for any caste or class of persons. Hence, no caste, class or category-wise data is maintained. 

    “However, the government is committed to social diversity in the appointment of judges in the SC and has also been requesting the Chief Justices of HC, while sending proposals for the appointment of judges, for due consideration to be given to suitable candidates, minorities and women to ensure social justice,” he assured. 

    New Rules

    The government is committed to social diversity in the appointment of judges in the SC and has also been requesting the Chief Justices of High Courts, while sending proposals for the appointment of judges to consider suitable candidates, minorities and women