Government studying Supreme Court's verdict to select judges

NEW DELHI: The government is examining a separate order authored by two judges when the Supreme Court convicted Justice CS Karnan for contempt of court as part of its consultations for revising the guidelines for appointing high court judges.

Justices Jasti Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi, part of a seven-member bench that convicted then Calcutta HC judge Karnan, had underlined the “need to revisit the process of selection and appointment of judges” in their separate order dated July 4, 2017.

It said the case highlighted two key issues. First, there is a need to revisit the process of selection and appointment of judges to the constitutional courts. Second, the need to set up appropriate legal regime to deal with situations where the conduct of a judge of a constitutional court requires corrective measures — other than impeachment — to be taken.


The judgement is being examined by the government in its consultation pertaining to revised Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for selection of HC judges, which is to be finalised in conjunction with the Supreme Court.

The development assumes significance since the judgement lays emphasis on the need to revisit the process of selection of judges.

The government’s move to enact National Judicial Appointments Commission to replace the existing collegium system was struck down by SC in 2015. NJAC sought to give politicians and civil society a final say in the appointment of judges.

Justices Chelameswar and Gogoi, along with two other senior most SC Judges, had last month held a press conference mounting a virtual revolt against CJI Dipak Misra. The government also came under attack for not finalising the revised MoP.

Highly placed sources in the government told ET that few “major issues” remain for resolution on the subject.

These include: institutional mechanism in forming a committee to evaluate the suitability of candidates at SC and HC levels; and widening the zone of consideration by seeking names from judges of SC for appointment in SC and for appointment in HCs from judges other than those in the high court collegium.

Such a step to achieve transparency in selection of judges was initiated by former CJI RM Lodha. However, it was suspended by his successor Justice H L Dattu, citing “difficulties” in following the process. The government is in talks with the apex court to look at widening the zone of consideration of selection of Judges.

Another bone of contention with regard to MoP, government sources said, is that the Secretariat has been reduced to maintenance of database of HC judges in Supreme Court and judicial officers in high courts. Also, the government’s demand to decline the appointment of SC and HC judge(s) being against national interest or in overriding public interest remains to be resolved with SC. Lastly, the government’s demand of a complaint mechanism for dealing with complaints against those recommended.