Justice Punchhi’s recommendations make Govt think twice

NEW DELHI, May 6: Even before his three nominees for elevation to the Supreme Court could pass government consideration, Chief Justice Madan...

NEW DELHI, May 6: Even before his three nominees for elevation to the Supreme Court could pass government consideration, Chief Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi has sent in two more names for appointment to the Apex Court. These fresh nominations are for prospective vacancies in the court. One slot sought to be filled up is the vacancy which will arise when Justice Punchhi himself retires in October this year.

If the delay in acting on Punchhi’s earlier three nominees is because of reservations in the Law Ministry that adequate consultation may not have gone into the selection process, there are even greater misgivings over the latest recommendations of the CJI. It is unusual for names for Supreme Court judgeships to be sent in so much in advance. Nor is it common for a Chief Justice to appoint a judge for the vacancy arising out of his own retirement. Legal circles aver that Justice A S Anand who is likely to succeed Justice Punchhi as CJI, has not been consulted. Since, in all probability, Justice Anand willtake over as Chief Justice when Punchhi retires in October this year — for a term of two and a half years — it is felt that he ought to have been fully involved in the process.

By convention, the Chief Justice, before selecting names for judgeship, consults his brother judges, particularly those who are number two and number three in the order of seniority. However, Justice G N Ray, who was consulted by the CJI in the selection of the five names retired on May 1 and Justice Suresh Aggarwal, whom he also consulted, retires in September.

Story continues below this ad

Former Chief Justice J S Verma initiated the practice of consulting his five seniormost colleagues over all appointments and transfers. The minutes of Verma’s joint consultations with five judges for Supreme Court appointments have, in fact, been signed by Chief Justice Punchhi who was then number two in the judicial hierarchy.

Chief Justice Punchhi’s recommendations for SC judgeships are: Chief Justice U C Bannerjee of the Andhra Pradesh High Court; Justice RameshChandra Lahoti of the Delhi High Court, Chief Justice Bhawani Singh of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court; Justice B N Aggarwal of the Patna High Court and Justice K G Balakrishnan of the Gujarat High Court. At the same time, the claims of some senior chief justices of premier high courts have been bypassed. The appointment of Justice Bhawani Singh and Justice B D Aggarwal would have a great bearing on the future of the Supreme Court. Both judges are comparatively younger in age and if appointed to the Supreme Court, could aspire — by virtue of their eventual seniority on the bench — to be Chief Justices with long tenures. Justice Bhawani Singh, if appointed a Supreme Court judge, could hope to be CJI for five years and Justice Aggarwal for over three years. It is, therefore, felt that appointments of such far-reaching importance should not be made in haste and without due consultation.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Punchhi, in his short span in office, has also created ripples by recommending the transfer ofthree Chief Justices of the state high courts. The Committee on Judicial Accountability, which had earlier campaigned against Justice Punchhi’s appointment, has condemned what it describes as “selective transfers” by the CJI. The present controversy has reinforced the move across the board to appoint a National Judicial Commission which will look into all aspects of judicial appointments and transfers.