New Delhi The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it is “very, very unhappy” with the government, noting that in a democratic country governed by the rule of law, the government cannot reject names recommended by selection committees headed by apex court judges. . appointments to tribunals.
“If the government has the last laugh, then what is the sanctity of the selections we have made after conducting the interviews… We are deeply saddened by the way things are going and how the government is working.” A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana told Attorney General KK Venugopal.
“You cannot deny access to justice. How can people be left in limbo? This is the problem everywhere. We are waiting very patiently. You will have to make appointments to the tribunal… Tell your government,” the bench, which also included Justices Dhananjay Y. Chandrachud and L. Nageswara Rao, told the Attorney General (AG). It gave the government two weeks to make the appointments. Go to the Tribunal and file a comprehensive affidavit in this regard.
“Please file your affidavit with vacancy and appointment posts. And wherever appointments cannot be made, give reasons,” the court directed.
The bench observed that some of the recent appointments to the tribunal reflect “cherry-picking” and “lack of service jurisprudence”, where the government decided to exclude names from the main select lists and wait lists prepared for future appointments. elected members from
Hours before hearing of petitions highlighting huge vacancies in all 15 tribunals in the country, the Center had filed an affidavit stating that it has appointed 84 members to various tribunals since 2020 and now has no recommendations. is not pending.
Of them, 39 members were appointed this month after the court on September 6 slammed the government for sitting on the recommendations made by the Search cum Selection Committees (SCSCs) more than a year ago.
According to a note read by the bench in the last hearing, around 200 posts are vacant in 15 tribunals.
Commenting on the recent appointments, the bench said: “The selection committee selected 11 judicial members and 10 technical members for the NCLT. But the members were cherry-picked. Four names were selected from the main list and six were selected from the waiting list. What kind of selection is this? What kind of appointment is this? What kind of service jurisprudence is this?”
Don’t miss a story! Stay connected and informed with Mint.
download
Our App Now!!
.