Pursuing Judges' Appointment Issue With Govt On Administrative Side : CJI BR Gavai

Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai today (July 24) said that the Supreme Court was pursuing on its administrative side the issue of pending judicial appointments with the Union Government.

CJI made this statement when Senior Advocate Arvind Datar and Advocate Prashant Bhushan jointly mentioned the petitions seeking directions to the Union Government to act on Collegium recommendations in a time-bound manner. Datar said that the matter was last listed before the bench of Justice SK Kaul on December 5, 2023, but it was deleted from his list the last moment.

"The matter last came on 5th December before Justice Kaul. It was dropped from the list suddenly. There are names recommended in 2019 reiterated in 2021 and 2022, still pending," Datar said.

Datar said that he can hand over a list of the pending names. "Two names have been withdrawn. One from Bombay and another from Delhi. They have withdrawn," Datar said, referring to Advocates Rajesh Datar and Shwetashree Majumdar withdrawing their consent for judgeship in Bombay and Delhi High Courts respectively due to the delay on the part of the Union Government in notifying their appointments.

Agreeing to list the matter after two weeks, the CJI stated that there is an ongoing effort to resolve the pendency of appointments on the administrative side. 

"We are also trying to pursue on the administrative side. Quite a few names have been cleared," CJI said.

"What happens is, these names are there for many years. They will lose seniority," Datar said. "They also lose interest," Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for another petitioner, said.

CJI Gavai then said, "The lady from Delhi, who withdrew, she was extraordinary." "She was the topper of National Law School," Bhushan said.

Datar said that the Court has laid down guidelines for the time to be taken for various stages of judicial appointments and hence, delay of 3-4 years on the part of the Government is not acceptable.

"My lords have laid down guidelines, 4 weeks, etc, and at different stages. It cannot be 3years and 4 years." 

Bhushan then said that the Court may have to fix timelines as it was done for the Governors to act on Bills. However, CJI interjected, asking Bhushan not to speak of that issue, since it is now pending before a Constitution Bench.

One of the matters before the Court is a contempt petition filed by the Advocates Association Bengaluru against the Union Law Secretary for the breach of the timelines set by the Supreme Court. Another is a PIL filed by Common Cause.

Case : Advocates Association Bengaluru v. Barun Mitra & Anr. | Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2021 in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 2419 of 2019