Madras HC Lawyers approach CJI and PM to reconsider transfer request of Justice R. Sudhakar and Justice V. Ramasubramanian
Referring to a newspaper article which claimed that Justice R. Sudhakar and Justice V. Ramasubramanian had sought to be transferred from Madras High Court, around 100 senior lawyers on Tuesday requested the Chief Justice of India to reconsider the transfer. While Justice Ramasubramanian’s request to be transferred to the Telangana and Andhra Pradesh High Court has reportedly been accepted, the Justice R Sudhakar’s request to be transferred to Jammu and Kashmir High Court is being considered.
The Memorandum submitted to the Chief Justice of India and the Prime Minister by the delegation led by Senior Advocate R. Krishnamoorthy reportedly stated, “The institution is going through a phase of crisis in as much as the present number of judges is much below 50% of the sanctioned strength. If two senior judges, who are alive to the local needs of the Bar as well as litigants, are transferred, it would lead to a void and would be disastrous to the institution.”
The lawyers claimed that the contributing factors for the transfer were the negative publicity generated by the action of some fringe elements that have no stake in the Bar. The two Judges, it says, were “unjustifiably” criticized for taking action against certain members of the Bar, who later “played the caste card and engaged in unsavory mudslinging.” These considerations, they averred, do not reflect the opinion of the majority of Bar, who are aware of the judges’ excellent work. Appreciating the judgments rendered by the two Judges, the memo stated that, “They justly occupy a pride of place among judges of the Madras high court.”
The memo submitted that the quality of the Judges is a significant contributor to perception of the High Court in the eyes of the general public. “This representation is to re-assure you and the two judges of this opinion held by the majority of the members of the Bar. The proposed transfers, if given effect, would certainly send out a wrong signal to the general public and cause further damage to the reputation of this High Court,” it further stated.