Wish Judges Were Appointed As Speedily As Election Commissioners : Supreme Court

While hearing petitions challenging the law governing the appointment of Election Commissioners, the Supreme Court on Wednesday remarked that it wished judges too were appointed with the same speed as Election Commissioners.

A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma is hearing the petitions challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Bill, 2023, as per which the ECs will be appointed by a selection panel comprising the Prime Minister, a Union Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, for one of the petitioners, argued that the appointment of ECs were carried out in a swift manner without any effective consultation with the Opposition Leader. He told the bench that in 2024, an application was filed to restrain the appointment of Election Commissioners as per the new law. Preempting the hearing of the application in the Court, the Union hurriedly took steps to appoint the ECs, Hansaria claimed.

He said that on March 13, 2024, the Opposition Leader was given a list of 200 shortlisted names. The next day, the selection committee met and selected the names Gyanesh Kumar and Sukhbir Sandhu. "This is what happens when you give absolute power to one individual. How can the LoP be expected to look into so many names in one day?" Hansaria submitted.

"We can only say that we wish such speed is shown in the appointment of judges. Especially High Court judges," Justice Datta commented.

At the same time, the bench was not prepared to accept the argument that the appointments were hastily done to derail the hearing of the stay application. The bench asked how the Union could be presumed to be aware that the application was going to be heard on March 15.

"Can you attribute any motive without showing us that the union knew about 15th being the date? When you want us to declare that something was activated by motive, you need to satisfy us that the union also knew that 15th is the date and that hence, it(selection) was brought forward to 14th," Justice Datta said.

When Hansaria admitted that he had no material to establish such knowledge on the part of the Union, Justice Datta asked him not to press the argument. "Let's leave it at that."

Hansaria clarified that the petitioner is not challenging the appointment of any individual Election Commissioners and was questioning the validity of the Act.

The arguments are underway. Live updates can be followed here.