Supreme Court, government unable to reach consensus on norms of selecting High Court judges

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court and the government haven’t been able to find common ground on a proposal by the latter for wider consultations on the selection of high court judges, among various other issues.

The government had suggested in the revised memorandum of procedure (MoP) that a high court chief justice consult all judges of the court along with the advocate general of the state and the attorney general before recommending names. The aim behind this was said to be greater transparency in picking judges for the superior judiciary.

But this and other suggestions didn’t find favour with the apex court collegium, which returned the revised MoP on May 27, as first reported by ET, suggesting changes. The apex court has cited the 1993 judgment that led to the collegium system, which involves just the top rung of the judiciary in the process.

ET has reviewed the reply that was sent back by the Supreme Court chief justice that’s in tabular form and records the collegium’s objections to the various suggestions.

The SC had upheld the primacy of the collegium system last year when it struck down an amendment establishing the National Judicial Appointments Commission, which would give the executive a greater role in selecting judges. Meanwhile, it was reported last week that the government had turned down the SC collegium’s recommendation of a person as chief justice a high court.

The government’s proposal on high court judges had its genesis in a practice adopted by a HC chief justice who was recently elevated to SC, people familiar with the matter said. The judge used to consult other judges before recommending names for elevation, seeking two names each from them to create a wider pool of candidates.

The names were then shortlisted by the HC collegium comprising the chief justice and the next two senior-most high court judges before recommendations were sent to the Supreme Court and the government.