Collegium rejected HC judge’s appointment, but UPA government pushed it: Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad

Prasad said, government was 'quite keen' to appoint a National Judicial Commission for making such appointments.

By: Press Trust of India | New Delhi | Updated: July 22, 2014 9:32 pm
Prasad said in 2003, the collegium had "certain reservations" and had made some enquiries and decided that the case of this judge should not be taken up. Prasad said in 2003, the collegium had “certain reservations” and had made some enquiries and decided that the case of this judge should not be taken up.

The Supreme Court collegium was initially hesitant to recommend extension of a Madras High Court judge who was under corruption cloud but did so later after a nudge from the UPA government, Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad revealed in Parliament amid furore created by AIADMK members for the second day on Tuesday.

Prasad said in 2003, the collegium had “certain reservations” and had made some enquiries and decided that the case of this judge should not be taken up. But later during the UPA rule, a clarification was sought by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) as to why he should not be recommended, the minister said in the Lok Sabha.

The collegium again said he should not have been recommended at all, he said. Later, the Department of Justice in the Law Ministry wrote a note to the collegium following which it said that his case can be considered for some extension, Prasad said, adding the matter stood there thereafter.

“…on July 16, 2005 to be precise, again a note went from the then Department of Justice with the approval of the then Law Minister indicating about certain sensitivity. Thereafter, a call was taken by the collegium that his case can be considered for some extension and he was made permanent,” he said.

The Law Minister said the judge has since retired and was no more now. The judges of the collegium have also retired. Quoting Supreme Court’s observation in Shanti Bhushan case, he remarked the “clock cannot be put back”. His response came after an uproar over the issue forced two adjournments of the Lok Sabha as agitated AIADMK members stormed the Well demanding that the name of the then DMK minister who “pressurised” the UPA government to confirm the appointment of controversial judge be made public.

The Rajya Sabha also saw disruption on the issue, with AIADMK and DMK members clashing on the matter when it assembled for the day leading to a brief adjournment.
The concern raised by the AIADMK members was well appreciated and there is imperative need to improve the system of judges appointment, Prasad said, adding the government was “quite keen” to appoint a National Judicial Commission for making such appointments.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. S
    S.Gonesh
    Jul 22, 2014 at 5:25 pm
    India need a Hindu jurisdiction, This is the right of the Hindus.The colonial system must be put aside and introduce the mostadvance Hindu system.
    Reply
    1. S
      S.Gonesh
      Jul 22, 2014 at 4:54 pm
      India need a Hindu jurisdiction. Put an end to the colonial type ofsystem. Hindus reject it. The Hindu jurisdiction is the only best one inthe world.
      Reply
      1. J
        JayKay
        Jul 22, 2014 at 6:07 pm
        Mr. Pranab Mukharjee has also been exceptionally loyal to Congress. I having full respect for the supreme post and President of India and judiciary, expect an un-biased and hard decision from him in sing and de-recognising Congress and concerned political party from Tamilnadu for high treason and violation of oath of Govenment. Without any loss of time !
        Reply
        1. K
          Kabir
          Jul 22, 2014 at 9:09 pm
          but didn't you recently reject a judge who was recommended by the collegium? Should we consider collegium's opinion or not? Or only when convenient you choose which decision to support and which not? :-)
          Reply
          1. R
            roger
            Jul 22, 2014 at 10:59 pm
            This is going to get more and more interesting. The UPA hounded Mr Modi with "Gujarat 2002". For next 10 years they the Con.Gress better find a shelter to hide because there will be tonnes of corruption, nepotism, appeat cases which will come to rock their sleep.
            Reply
            1. K
              K Ramesh
              Jul 22, 2014 at 4:52 pm
              If the UPA govt pushed it, why did the collegium expose the person whoever he or she may be to the press. This way the collegium might have made the history and the corrupt person in UPA would have been brought to the book. Evidently the members of the collegium must be rank-careerist-with-no-moral conviction.
              Reply
              1. V
                V. Ramaswami
                Jul 22, 2014 at 11:00 pm
                What the country needs is the equivalent of the U.S. system of open, televised Senate inquiries for top level judicial appointments. That should be preceded by independent reports of agencies like the CBI and Enforcement Directorate with clear proviso of indictment and prosecution if enough evidence exists for any illegal activity by the nominee. If the last resort for justice, namely the judiciary, itself becomes corrupt then there is little hope for the country.
                Reply
                1. Load More Comments