Spotlight On Recent Appointments To The Supreme Court - Justice Aravind Kumar

A general criticism of the Indian Courts has been that very little is known to the public about the judges being recommended by respective Collegium before their appointment, on merit and suitability. A designated Secretariat ideally should do the job, unfortunately we don’t have such a mechanism. Livelaw has taken an initiative to share relevant information about the appointees and we are starting with the appointments to the Apex Court. The focus is to shed light on some of their significant high court judgments.We traced the judicial career of Justice Pankaj Mithal in Part 1 and of Justice Dipankar Datta in Part II. In Part III, we offered a glimpse into the judicial philosophy of Justice Sanjay Karol. In Part IV, we offered some of the highlights of Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar’s judicial pronouncements during his tenures as a High Court Judge and as the Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court. In Part V, we surveyed some of the key judgments delivered by Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, during his career as a Judge of the Patna and Andhra Pradesh High Courts. In Part VI, we offered a peek into the judicial philosophy of Justice Manoj Misra. In Part VII, we brought to light the jurisprudence of Justice Rajesh Bindal, who served four High Courts, before his elevation to the Supreme Court. In this concluding part, we trace the judicial career of Justice Aravind Kumar, which seems to have persuaded the majority in Supreme Court Collegium to recommend him overlooking his lack of seniority over other eligible and suitable candidates in the consideration zone. BackgroundJustice Aravind Kumar was enrolled in 1987 as Advocate and was appearing in Civil Courts, Magistrate Courts, Appellate Tribunals for about four years and shifted practice to High Court. He was appointed as Additional Central Government Standing Counsel at High Court of Karnataka in 1999. He was appointed as Member of Regional Direct Taxes Advisory Committee in 2002. He had also been practising on taxation side. He was appointed as Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department. He served as Assistant Solicitor General of India in 2005.He was legal advisor to various statutory corporations and companies and had been appointed as Special Public Prosecutor for CBI. He was elevated as Additional Judge, Karnataka High Court on June 26, 2009 and as permanent Judge on December 7, 2012. He was appointed as Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court on October 13, 2021. Dissent in Supreme Court’s three-member CollegiumHe was elevated as Judge of the Supreme Court on February 13 this year. The Supreme Court Collegium’s Resolution says that he stood at S. No.26 in the combined All-India-seniority of High Court Judges at the time of recommendation. The Collegium noted that in the seniority of Judges hailing from the Karnataka High Court, he stood at S. No.2 and that at present, the Bench of the Supreme Court is represented by two Judges from the Karnataka High Court, namely, Justices A.S.Bopanna and B.V.Nagarathna. The Resolution specifically discloses that in regard to Justice Aravind Kumar’s appointment, Justice K.M.Joseph, a member of the Collegium, had expressed his reservations on the ground that his name could be considered at a later stage. Justice Joseph’s dissent, however, could not prevail over the majority view held by the other two members of the collegium, namely, the Chief Justice of India, D.Y.Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. The Resolution claims that while recommending Justice Rajesh Bindal’s and Justice Aravind Kumar’s names, the Collegium considered the following aspects: The seniority of Chief Justices and senior puisne Judges in their respective parent High Courts as well as overall seniority of the High Court Judges;The merit, performance and integrity of the judges under consideration; andThe need to ensure diversity and inclusion in the Supreme Court by: (i) representation of High Courts which are not represented or are inadequately represented, in the Supreme Court; (ii) appointing persons from marginalized and backward segments of society; (iii) gender diversity; and (iv) representation of minorities It is not clear how the Collegium’s majority justified the recommendation to elevate Justice Aravind Kumar under any of these aspects. By expressing that Justice Aravind Kumar’s elevation could be considered at a later stage, Justice Joseph has clearly implied that his lack of seniority in the All-India-seniority of High Court Judges went against him. Justice Joseph might have also felt that with the senior Judge from Karnataka, Justice Bopanna retiring on May 19 next year, there is no urgency to fill the probable vacancy arising from his retirement in the middle of next year. Justice Aravind Kumar is slated to retire on July 13, 2027, after a tenure of four years and five months. Livelaw puts together some of the judgments authored by Justice Aravind Kumar as a judge of the Karnataka...

Spotlight On Recent Appointments To The Supreme Court - Justice Aravind Kumar

V Venkatesan

Tags