The Union Law Ministry has already sent its request to CJI UU Lalit to nominate his successor.
The Union Law Ministry has already sent its request to CJI UU Lalit to nominate his successor.
The Supreme Court Collegium has resolved not to take Any further deliberations on 10 names identified for consideration as judges of the apex court Law Ministry has already sent its request to Chief Justice of India UU Lalita to nominate his successor.
Justices DY Chandrachud and S Abdul Nazeer had objected to the CJI’s proposal recommending names for appointment as Supreme Court judges through circulation. The resolution of the collegium states that Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph had concurred with the proposal of the Chief Justice.
A collegium resolution, dated 9 October but published on Monday, 12 October, describing the exact turn of events and circumstances, led it to leave its task of recommending new judges to the Supreme Court “unfinished”. Compelled to.
The resolution, signed by Chief Justice Lalit and four fellow members of the collegium, said informal discussions were going on for some time to fill judicial vacancies in the apex court.
A formal meeting was held on 26 September. A total of 11 names were considered that day.
The resolution said the collegium had for the first time on September 26 initiated the process of objectively evaluating the qualifications of potential candidates and even circulated their decisions to examine the quality of their judicial work.
Out of this, Justice Dipankar Dutta, Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, had obtained the unanimous approval of the collegium and his name was recommended to the government for approval for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court.
The consideration of the remaining 10 names was deferred till September 30 as some members of the collegium wanted to see more decisions written by these candidates.
However, the meeting to be held on 30 September could not take place. “… Since one of the members (Justice DY Chandrachud) did not attend the meeting, the CJI sent a motion by way of circulation vide letter dated 30 September,” the resolution explained.
The resolution did not give details of the “proposal”. But it was widely reported that the proposal included four names, including the name of a senior advocate, for the recommendation of the collegium to the government for appointment as judges of the Supreme Court.
The CJI’s proposal was approved by two judges of the collegium, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph, in their replies on October 1 and October 7 respectively.
However, Justices Chandrachud and S Abdul Nazeer objected to the method adopted by the CJI.
“However, in the letters of Justices Chandrachud and S. Abdul Nazeer, no views have been disclosed against any of these candidates,” the resolution said.
The CJI then wrote a second letter on October 2, seeking reasons and inviting alternative suggestions from Justices Chandrachud and Nazir.
“There was no response to the said communication,” the resolution said.
The CJI’s resolution had thus split the collegium, with Justices Kaul and Joseph concurring, while Justices Chandrachud and Nazir objected to the “procedure of selection and appointment of judges by circulation”.
“Therefore the matter was ideally suited for discussion at the table among the judges forming the collegium,” the motion said.
But the Law Ministry letter on October 7 seeking nomination of the Chief Justice of his successor, who should be Justice Chandrachud as per the seniority criteria, intervened.
Chief Justice Lalit is due to retire on November 8. The new and 50th Chief Justice of India is to assume office from November 9. The Convention directs that an outgoing CJI cannot hold collegium meetings when the process of appointing his successor has already begun.
“Under these circumstances, there is no need to take any further steps and the unfinished business is closed without any deliberation in the meeting convened on 30th September, 2022. The September 30 meeting is discharged,” announced the collegium resolution.