Supreme Court directs collegium to start appointing judges

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked its collegium to go ahead with appointment of judges to high courts and the Supreme Court, which was stopped since the government notified setting up the National Judicial Appointments Commission ( NJAC).

A Constitution bench headed by Justice Jagjit Singh Khehar said that the process of the collegium appointing judges could continue, while reserving its order on a host of suggestions on improving the working of the collegium and making it transparent.

“It is needless to mention that the process of appointment of judges by the collegium will continue and shall not be put on hold,” Justice Khehar said concluding the proceedings on transparency.




The Centre has refused to revise the existing procedure to make the process more transparent without a court ruling. “Either the court should do it or leave it to us,” an unusually combative attorney-general (AG), Mukul Rohatgi, told the Constitution bench. The bench had asked the AG on Wednesday to suggest a revised memorandum of procedure, which he agreed to. However, on Thursday, the AG expressed his inability to do so.

“There have been three revisions of the memorandum of procedure,” he told the court. The last drastic revision was made in 1999 after consultations between the PM and the CJI. “It is an executive document finalised by constitutional functionaries to make a system unworkable. I can’t get a revised draft vetted by the PM and then submit it to the court to accept or not. What happens then to the CJI? His role is finished. I am bound by the rules. I can’t do this. What happens if the court decides not to accept any suggestions (on transparency)?”

The AG said that the court should only lay down the principles that should be followed in ushering in transparency in the process and leave the nitty-gritties to the government to work out. “The court may not go into the minute details of rules and regulations. The government will work it out (with the CJI) after the court lays down the principles,” he said.

The bench tried its best to get him to change his mind. Justice Madan BLokur suggested that the memorandum had huge gaps and that may have created all the problems in the first place. But the AG would not be persuaded. “There is no procedure for a draft memo. Let the court not get involved in execution (of a ruling),” he said.

Justice Goel also tried to prevail over the AG, by saying that NJAC had also contemplated procedural changes. But the AG retaliated: “Either you dictate to put the burden on us. We will examine all suggestions and put a model before the Chief Justice of India."