Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
In what could be one of the last appointments to be made through the collegium system, the government Wednesday cleared the decks for elevation of Orissa Chief Justice Amitava Roy as a judge of the Supreme Court.
The government moved swiftly over the appointment of Justice Roy since the judge was only a few days from his scheduled retirement from the High Court. A High Court judge retires at the age of 62 whereas a Supreme Court judge has tenure till he or she turns 65. Roy would turn 62 on March 1. The recommendation by the collegium had reached the Law Ministry around 10 days ago.
[related-post]
According to the sources, the government wished to avoid any confrontation with the judiciary over the appointment of judges at the moment, and hence it acted briskly in pushing through the recommendation made by the collegium.
Also, the move was in line with a statement made by Union Law Minister Sadanand Gowda that there was no stalemate in appointing judges till the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was constituted.
The NJAC, which is expected to replace the collegium system soon, will be a six-member body, headed by the Chief Justice of India.
It will also include two seniormost Supreme Court judges, Union Minister of Law and Justice and two “eminent persons” nominated by another panel comprising the Prime Minister, CJI and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha or leader of the largest opposition party in the Lower House.
As reported by The Indian Express on February 22, the latest collegium meeting headed by Chief Justice of India H L Dattu could reach consensus on only one name for recommendation although the names of at least five other High Court judges were also deliberated upon.
As per the sources, apart from Justice Roy, the names of the chief justices of the high courts of Madras, Madhya Pradesh, Bombay, Calcutta and Delhi were also discussed. But only one name was approved for recommendation because the collegium failed to arrive at a consensus on the rest, they added.
A major objection to two names related to their region already having adequate representation on the Supreme Court bench, sources said. As for the third name, there were representations from a few lawyers opposing the elevation, they added.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram