Plea In Madras High Court Challenges Recent HC Collegium Recommendations, Alleges Favouritism & Bias

The public interest litigation filed by Advocate A Prem Kumar, an advocate practising in Thiruvannamalai, alleges that the collegium has recommended candidates having strong political affiliations or favouring one specific political party ruling the Centre. It has been alleged that the recommendation is overshadowed by favouritism and bias and would affect the independence and credibility of the judiciary.

The petitioner, Prem Kumar, stated that recently, the Madras High Court Collegium, consisting of the Chief Justice and the two senior-most judges (Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice MS Ramesh), had recommended the names of 13 persons to be appointed as judges. Kumar argued that all these persons had strong political affiliations either to the central ruling party or to the former ruling party of the State.

Kumar submitted that the judges should be selected based on their merit and not political influence or favouritism, to uphold the credibility of the judiciary and reinforce the principles of fairness and impartiality. He also stated that merit based transparent appointments would prevent political biases from entering the system, ensuring that justice is delivered effectively, transparently, and without any fear or favour.

He also pointed out for a long period, members from a particular community were not being considered for appointment as Judges. He added that such non-consideration affects social diversity, which is enshrined in the constitution.

He also submitted that despite being the second senior most judge in the high court, Justice Nisha Banu was not included in the collegium and instead, third senior most judge, Justice MS Ramesh, was included in the collegium. He submitted that Justice Banu had not joined the Kerala High Court at the time, and the Chief Justice ought to have taken it into consideration. He thus stated that the constitution of the collegium itself was fundamentally flawed.

The petition further stated that the method currently followed for recommending judges would show that preference is given for law officers and government counsel, while independent advocates with long and established practice are mostly left out. He stated that such a narrow selection process undermines fairness, equality of opportunity , and opens doors to arbitrariness. He further stated that trial court advocates are the backbone of justice delivery system and their exclusion would lead to a judiciary which is unaware of the ground realities faced by litigants.

Thus, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Registrar(Judicial) to reconsider the recommendations. The petition also seeks an interim injunction restraining the Registrar from acting on or accepting the recommendations of the collegium.

Case Title: A Prem Kumar v The Union of India and Others

Case No: WP No. 50487/2025