The Supreme Court on Friday said it was both “troublesome” and “very disturbing” that the government delayed some judicial appointments and transfers in High Courts while certain “picked and chosen” names were cleared in hours.
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, heading a three-judge Bench, said the transfers of some High Court judges were stalled for months together by the government.
The judge said that government delay to notify certain transfers sent a message that “somebody is able to delay while somebody cannot”.
Justice T. Raja continued to serve as Acting Chief Justice of Madras High Court till his retirement despite the Collegium’s recommendation to transfer him to Rajasthan High Court. The government kept the proposed transfer of Justice S. Muralidhar from Orissa HC to Madras pending for months. The Collegium had to finally recall the recommendation as the judge was due to retire.
Justice Siddharth Mridul’s recent transfer as Chief Justice of Manipur High Court was held back for months until the Supreme Court prodded the government.
Additional Solicitor General Balbir Singh, for the government, said transfer recommendations of High Court judges were “considered in batches”.
“Why do you do that, and why do you delay even transfers? The person being transferred is already a judge… Five senior most judges of the Supreme Court have recommended the transfer because they have reached a studied conclusion that the judge would serve better in another High Court,” Justice Kaul addressed the government.
‘Selective segregation’
The Bench said the government’s selective segregation of names had disturbed judicial seniority.
“When you [government] appoint some and not appoint others, the very premise of seniority gets disturbed… Your pick-and-choose creates a lot of problems… You have recently cleared two names for the Madras High Court, but the oldest names are still pending,” Justice Kaul observed.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave and advocate Amit Pai said the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended advocate R. John Sathyan on February 16, 2022. The Collegium had reiterated Mr. Sathyan’s name in January 2023.
On March 21 this year, the Collegium had instructed the government to notify Mr. Sathyan’s name before clearing others in order to retain his seniority. However, this did not stop the government from appointing Justice Victoria Gowri to the Madras High Court.
One of the government’s grouses against Mr. Sathyan was he had shared a web portal’s article critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
“I do not think there are any issues on which the government should have reservations, “ Justice Kaul said.
Like Mr. Sathyan, the Collegium recommendations of senior advocate Saurabh Kirpal, an openly gay lawyer, and advocate Somasekhar Sundaresan, for appointments to the Delhi and Bombay High Courts, have been pending for long. The Supreme Court Collegium recommended Mr. Kirpal in November 2021. Mr. Sundaresan was recommended in February 2022.
Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, on the Bench, said the government had consistently remained silent in court on why it segregated names.
“Suppose five names are sent to you, you notify four and pull back one… Why do you do that? You have said nothing about that,” Justice Dhulia asked the government.
The court, in its order, recorded that the government had 10 names awaiting judicial appointment in High Courts and 11 pending transfer recommendations. Mr. Singh gave his assurance that the pending files would be “sorted out”. He sought a hearing in the second week of November.
But the court fixed the case on November 7. Justice Kaul said he did not want the case to be listed in the closing week before Diwali holidays.
“Let’s have some progress before Diwali. Let us celebrate it better,” Justice Kaul told Mr. Singh.
