The Supreme Court on Tuesday once again expressed its displeasure over the Central government selectively ‘picking and choosing’ names from the recommendations made by the Collegium for the appointment of judges.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia further conveyed its concerns to Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani about certain proposals made by the Collegium for the transfer of High Court judges pending with the Centre.
Citing the recent example of appointments cleared for the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the Bench said the Supreme Court Collegium recommended names of five Advocates for elevation as judges of the High Court.
However, the Union government only cleared three names, ignoring the names placed in serial numbers 1 and 2. Several recent appointments made by the Centre reflected this trend, it added.
Deprecating this practice of segregation of Collegium recommendations, the Bench said this pick-and-choose must stop, adding that this was not an ‘off-hand’ remark, but something which has been discussed with the Collegium.
The top court of the country, while appreciating the progress in judicial appointments over the past two weeks following the monitoring by the Court, said that two aspects were still bothering the Court – the pendency of transfer and the selective acceptance of names.
The Apex Court recorded in its order the assurance of the Attorney General that he will take up the issue with the Government.
However, it warned that it might pass orders on the judicial side if the problem was not remedied by the Central government itself.
Making appointments in a selective manner would disturb the inter-se seniority and thus, it was hardly conducive to pursue young as well as successful lawyers to join the Bench, noted the Apex Court.
Calling the selective appointments as a matter of concern, the Bench said that if some appointments were made, while others were not, this would disturb the inter-se seniority.
The Apex Court recorded in the order that 14 names were pending with the government and five names were pending despite reiteration by the Collegium.