Centre Not Entitled To Segregate Collegium Resolutions, Supreme Court Should Act Tough Against Executive For Sitting Over Proposals : Justice MB Lokur

Former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B Lokur opined that the Central Government is not entitled to pick and choose names by segregating the resolutions made by the Supreme Court collegium. He added that it is unfair on the part of the Centre to keep certain collegium proposals pending.The retired Supreme Court judge was speaking in an interview with Manu Sebastian, the Managing Editor of LiveLaw, on the topic of judicial appointments. Responding to a query regarding the recent trend of Centre selectively keeping certain proposals pending, Justice Lokur said :"There are rumours of speculations as to why the government is taking so much of time, why are they taking up some and not the others. Is there some kind of favouritism, nepotism?Why is all this such a big secret? You have heard cases right here in Delhi where names have been sent, two people were picked up and other six were not picked up and two of them were appointed. Then after that, another four were appointed and two were not appointed. And then after that, another two were appointed. Why? Chief Justice Lodha had said at one point of time that don't segregate the names. What is actually being sent is one recommendation which consists of five names or 10 names. There is a reason for the order in which they are sent, the order could be seniority or probably the date of registration as a member of the bar Council. Now you disturb that because you segregate. That is like telling the collegium that 'listen, we don't care what you think, we will do what we think and there is nobody to question'. The Supreme Court collegium is to then keep quiet and says that 'okay, you are entitled to segregate'. No, but you're not entitled to segregate! It is one recommendation. You either accept it in the full, defer it in the full or reject it in the full . It affects the overall seniority of the person, don't piecemeal to pick up one person from here or there, it gives rise to rumours and speculations. Why should that happen?"Centre Splits Up Collegium Resolution, Withholds Approval For Justice Muralidhar's Transfer As Madras HC Chief JusticeOn Centre sitting over collegium resolutions Justice Lokur criticised the practice of the Centre sitting over collegium resolutions. He noted that certain names which have been reiterated by the collegium more than once have been ignored by the Centre, although as per the judicial precedent, the collegium reiterations are binding on the executive. Even when the names are returned, there is no way to know the reasons."If the government tells the Supreme Court collegium that we are returning these names for reconsideration or whatever, why are they sent back? Do we know? Except speculation, not even speculation, there is no way to understand why they are returning the names. You can't even speculate on that. The Supreme Court then sends it back, reiterates the name. The government sits on it for months all together, in some cases, for years together. Why are we not entitled to know these things? Is this the way the government wants to treat the Supreme Court of India- that 'we don't care what you recommend, we will do what we want'? Should we tolerate this, should we accept this? Can they say that 'Supreme Court, you can say whatever you want, but we will do what we want, we don't care'? I don't think that is fair to the judiciary, I don't think that is fair to the justice delivery system, to the institution, to the country that you treat our Supreme Court in this manner. You can't treat the Supreme Court in this manner, let's be clear about this"On asked what should be the response of the Supreme Court to such instances, he said "I think Supreme Court should be tough and there should be transparency".Other excerpts from the interviewTo what extent the collegium deliberations should be transparent?Justice Lokur: I am not suggesting that the deliberations of the collegium should be open to the public. I am not suggesting that at all. But people should know who are being considered. There has to be this balance and I will tilt the balance slightly in favour of transparency. It does not do any harm.Reasons should be given for selectionJustice Lokur : With regard to persons not being recommended, should the reasons be given? I don't think reasons should be given. That is a matter of privacy, reputation of the person involved, there could be a variety of factors why a person who has not been recommended. But when you have two people who are outstanding, why have you selected one and not selected the other- the reason for selecting should be made known? That can only be made known if there is any criteria which is laid down. And there is no criteria which is laid down. The only criteria is of age and in the case of high courts, the criteria is also of income. But there is no other criteria for High Court judges nor is there for a Supreme Court judge. So it is alright to say that we are selecting the best. Of course, you are...

Centre Not Entitled To Segregate Collegium Resolutions, Supreme Court Should Act Tough Against Executive For Sitting Over Proposals : Justice MB Lokur

Manu Sebastian

Tags