The Supreme Court agreed to hear tomorrow, a writ petition challenging the appointment of Advocate Lakshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri as Additional Judge of the Madras High Court.
The matter was mentioned by Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran before the Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, seeking urgent listing of the petition.
Observing that the Supreme Court Collegium had taken cognisance of the complaints against Gowri’s appointment, the CJI said that certain developments had taken place after the Supreme Court Collegium proposed the appointment of Advocate Gowri as Additional Judge, based on the recommendation forwarded by the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court Collegium.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had listed the matter for hearing on Friday. Soon after, the Central government notified Gowri’s appointment, leading to Ramachandran mentioning it again before the Bench led by the CJI.
Ramachandran cited a judgment of the Supreme Court, which said that there has been judicial intervention in the past to restrain the President from issuing warrant of appointment, after a person was found to be eligible.
He contended that in case of Gowri, ‘certain’ vital information was kept back from the Supreme Court Collegium, which led to the Collegium not being able to make an informed decision and without any meaningful consultation.
The CJI then said that he would constitute an appropriate Bench, which would hear the case tomorrow.
A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court by Advocates Anna Mathews, Sudha Ramalingam and D. Nagasila, seeking to set aside the recommendation concerning Gowri as unconstitutional for lack of effective consultation within the meaning of Article 217 of the Constitution.
The petitioners further sought disqualification of Gowri for the post of additional judge on account of her prejudices against the minorities, alleging that she bore ill-will against certain sections of people based on their religion.
They submitted that such a person was not able to render fair and impartial justice, which was the basic structure of the Constitution.
The writ petition filed by Advocates Anna Mathews, Sudha Ramalingam and D Nagasila seeks to set aside the recommendation concerning Gowri as unconstitutional for lack of effective consultation within the meaning of Article 217 of the Constitution.
Last week, some members of the Madras High Court Bar had submitted a representation to the CJI, seeking cancellation of Gowri’s proposed appointment on the ground that she had indulged in hate speech against Christians and Muslims and even had open affiliation with the BJP.
The Central Government notified the appointment of Advocate Gowri as an Additional Judge of the Madras High Court this afternoon.