20 April 2021 11:25 AM GMT
Expressing grave concerns at the mounting vacancies of High Court judges, the Supreme Court on Tuesday emphasized that the Central Government should proceed to make appointments immediately after the Supreme Court collegium has cleared the names.If the Government has any reservation over the Collegium recommendations, it should send back the names with specific reasons for reservations.Once...
Expressing grave concerns at the mounting vacancies of High Court judges, the Supreme Court on Tuesday emphasized that the Central Government should proceed to make appointments immediately after the Supreme Court collegium has cleared the names.
If the Government has any reservation over the Collegium recommendations, it should send back the names with specific reasons for reservations.
Once the Supreme Court collegium reiterates the names, the Centre should make the appointment within 3-4 weeks of such reiteration.
The court has laid-down the time-line as follows :
1. The Intelligence Bureau (IB) should submit its report/inputswithin 4 to 6 weeks from the date of recommendation of the High Court Collegium, to the Central Government.
2. It would be desirable that the Central Government forwardthe file(s)/recommendations to the Supreme Court within 8 to 12 weeks from the date of receipt of views from the State Government and the report/input from the IB.
3. It would be for the Government to thereafter proceed to make the appointment immediately on the aforesaid consideration and undoubtedly if Government has any reservations on suitability or in public interest, within thesame period of time it may be sent back to the Supreme Court Collegium with the specific reasons for reservation recorded
If the Supreme Court Collegium after consideration ofthe aforesaid inputs still reiterates the recommendation(s)unanimously (Cl. 24.1), such appointment should beprocessed and appointment should be made within 3 to 4weeks.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Surya Kant observed that it will be 'advisable' to follow the above time-line.
"The High Courts are in a crisis situation. There are almost 40%vacancies in the High Courts, with many of the larger High Courts working under 50% of their sanctioned strength", the bench noted in the order.
"We are conscious that the aforesaid exercise is collaborative in nature and we would expect promptness in this process to facilitate the larger cause of dispensation of timely justice", the Court said in conclusion of the order.
The bench passed the order in the the case PLR Projects Ltd vs Mahanadi Coalfields Pvt Ltd, which is a transfer petition in 2019 seeking to transfer to Supreme Court a case from the Orissa High Court on account of the lawyers strike there. While considering the case, the Supreme Court had delved into the issue of pendency of collegium recommendations at the Ministry level.
"…The convention laid down is that an endeavour should be made that recommendations for vacancies are sent six months in advance. This is an aspect which the Chief Justices of the High Courts would look into. This period of six months arises from the expectation that the said period would be enough for processing the names from the recommendation stage till appointment.
Thus, sending names six months in advance would be meaningful only if the process till appointment is complete within six months which is a work the Government must attend to", the bench had said in an order passed in November 2019.
Title : PLR Projects Ltd vs Mahanadi Coalfields Pvt Ltd
Coram : CJI SA Bobde, Justices SK Kaul and Surya Kant
Citation : LL 2021 SC 223
Click here to read/download judgment