In a first, Centre rejects collegium's recommendation for high court chief justice twice
New Delhi: The government and judiciary are at loggerheads once again, this time over appointment of a high court chief justice with Centre rejecting Supreme Court collegium’s recommendation twice. According to a report by
New Delhi: The government and judiciary are at loggerheads once again, this time over appointment of a high court chief justice with Centre rejecting Supreme Court collegium’s recommendation twice.
According to a report by Times of India, The collegium had recommended a judge's name for appointment as chief justice of a "prominent opposition-governed state" but the government turned it down. The collegium reiterated its recommendation, which makes it binding on the government to appoint the judge in question.
However, the government has asked the collegium to reconsider its decision citing that at least two sitting SC judges have expressed reservations about the judge in question.
The collegium had forwarded the objections of the two SC judges along with the recommendations. Two judges are believed to have worked with the judge in question and have written to the collegium saying the judge should not be elevated as chief justice.
The collegium comprises the four senior-most judges of the apex court and headed by the Chief Justice of India.
Government and judiciary are already at a deadlock over certain clauses in the Memorandum of Procedure that will guide appointments to the higher judiciary.
CJI TS Thakur on May 25 returned the government-drafted Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) rejecting almost all major suggestions. The draft talks about merit being the prime consideration for all appointments to the higher judiciary.
MoP also suggests that collegium must consult all judges on putting together a list of suitable candidates before shortlisting names.
The government has also proposed to reserve the right to reject any recommendation of the collegium in the "national interest" which is believed to be one of the major points of disagreement.