 |
|
Justice Atul S Chandurkar's elevation to the Supreme Court marks a significant development in the Indian judicial landscape. The central government's notification formalizing his appointment signals the culmination of a process initiated by the Supreme Court Collegium, led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai. The Collegium's recommendation, made on May 26, included not only Justice Chandurkar but also the Chief Justices of the Karnataka and Gauhati High Courts, namely N V Anjaria and Vijay Bishnoi, respectively. This collective elevation underscores the ongoing efforts to maintain and enhance the judiciary's strength and diversity. Justice Chandurkar's tenure is slated to continue until April 6, 2030, when he will reach the mandatory retirement age of 65, giving him a substantial period to contribute to the apex court's jurisprudence. The timing of Justice Chandurkar's appointment is also noteworthy. It occurred a mere two days after the retirement of Justice Abhay S Oka from the Supreme Court, who also hailed from the Bombay High Court. This timing suggests a strategic move to ensure continued representation of the Bombay High Court's legal expertise within the Supreme Court. However, Justice Chandurkar's elevation also resulted in him superseding the Chief Justices of the Kerala and Madras High Courts, Nitin Jamdar and K R Shriram, both of whom have roots in the Bombay High Court as well. This aspect of the appointment raises questions about the criteria used for elevation and the relative seniority and experience of the judges involved. While Justice Jamdar was appointed as a Bombay High Court judge on January 23, 2012, and Justice Shriram on June 21, 2013, the same day as Justice Chandurkar, the order in which they were administered the oath of office placed Justice Shriram ahead of Justice Chandurkar on the seniority list. This seemingly minor detail highlights the complexities inherent in determining judicial seniority and the factors that influence elevation decisions. Justice Chandurkar's background provides further insight into his legal journey. Born on April 7, 1965, he received his early education at St Vincent's High School in Pune. He then pursued higher education at Ness Wadia College, Pune, before obtaining a law degree from ILS Law College, Pune, a prestigious institution known for its rigorous legal training. He commenced his career as an advocate on July 21, 1988, working in the chambers of senior advocate B N Naik, who later became a judge of the High Court. This early mentorship likely played a crucial role in shaping Justice Chandurkar's legal acumen and professional trajectory. In 1992, Justice Chandurkar relocated to Nagpur, where he practiced before various courts. During this period, he also demonstrated his scholarly inclinations by authoring two books on significant pieces of Maharashtra legislation: the Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, and the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. These publications indicate a deep understanding of local laws and a commitment to contributing to legal scholarship. He was elevated as an additional judge of the Bombay High Court in June 2013, marking a significant milestone in his judicial career. He also served as an administrative judge (seniormost) at the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, demonstrating his leadership capabilities and administrative skills.
The article further highlights some of Justice Chandurkar's notable judgments, offering a glimpse into his judicial philosophy and approach to legal issues. In June 2024, a division bench led by Justice Chandurkar dismissed a plea by nine students of a college in Chembur who challenged a dress code that prohibited hijabs, among other religious identifiers. The judge reasoned that the college's instructions did not violate the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and religion. This decision underscores a judicial interpretation that prioritizes institutional regulations and discipline over individual expressions of religious identity, at least within the context of educational institutions. It is a judgment that reflects a particular understanding of the balance between individual rights and the authority of institutions to maintain order and decorum. In September 2024, Justice Chandurkar played a crucial role in resolving a split verdict on pleas challenging amended IT rules that empowered the government to identify “fake news” on social media platforms through a Fact Check Unit (FCU). He agreed with Justice Gautam S Patel, who was part of the division bench that delivered the split verdict and struck down the amended rules as ‘unconstitutional’ and violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (a) and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. This decision is particularly significant as it addresses the contentious issue of government regulation of online content and the potential for such regulation to infringe upon freedom of speech and expression. By siding with the opinion that deemed the amended rules unconstitutional, Justice Chandurkar demonstrated a commitment to protecting fundamental rights in the digital realm. The decision highlights the judiciary's role in safeguarding constitutional principles in the face of evolving technologies and government policies. In October 2024, a bench presided over by Justice Chandurkar stayed the Maharashtra government’s decision to take back over 116 acres of prime land parcel in the Charkop area in Kandivali (West) allotted for industrial purposes. This intervention suggests a concern for the potential disruption of industrial development and the need for careful consideration of government decisions that impact land use and economic activity. The stay order indicates a cautious approach to government actions that could have far-reaching consequences for businesses and the local economy. In March this year, a Justice Chandurkar-led bench dismissed a plea by a Dalit PhD student challenging his suspension by the Tata Institute of Social Science (TISS) over “repetitive misconduct and anti-national activities”. This case presents a complex intersection of issues, including freedom of expression, institutional discipline, and social justice concerns. The dismissal of the student's plea suggests a judicial deference to the institution's authority to maintain order and address perceived misconduct, even when such actions raise questions about potential discrimination or suppression of dissent. The inclusion of “anti-national activities” as a reason for suspension further complicates the matter, raising concerns about the potential for overreach in defining and punishing such activities.
More recently, Justice Chandurkar sought information from the Maharashtra government regarding the granting of heritage status to Savarkar Sadan, the residence of Hindutva ideologue VD Savarkar. He also ordered that the status of the property should not be changed until June 13. This intervention demonstrates a recognition of the importance of preserving historical and cultural heritage, particularly in the context of significant figures and movements. The order to maintain the property's status suggests a desire to prevent any alterations that could diminish its historical value or significance. The cases mentioned above, while limited in scope, offer valuable insights into Justice Chandurkar's judicial temperament and his approach to various legal and social issues. His rulings reflect a balance between upholding institutional authority, safeguarding fundamental rights, and promoting economic development. His elevation to the Supreme Court will undoubtedly bring a wealth of experience and perspective to the apex court's deliberations. Examining his decisions reveals a judge who navigates complex legal landscapes with a commitment to constitutional principles and a nuanced understanding of the social and economic realities that shape legal disputes. He is a judge who seems to weigh competing interests carefully before arriving at a decision. The Supreme Court Collegium's decision to recommend his appointment, and the central government's subsequent notification, speak to his reputation and standing within the legal community. As he embarks on his tenure as a Supreme Court judge, Justice Chandurkar will face new challenges and opportunities to shape the course of Indian jurisprudence. His past rulings provide a foundation for understanding his judicial philosophy, but his contributions to the Supreme Court will ultimately define his legacy. It is anticipated that he will bring his analytical skills, his understanding of Maharashtra-specific laws, and his commitment to constitutional principles to bear on the complex legal issues that come before the Supreme Court. His background, experience, and judicial record suggest that he will be a valuable addition to the apex court, contributing to its ongoing efforts to uphold justice and protect the rule of law. Only time will tell the full extent of his impact on the Indian legal system, but his journey to the Supreme Court is a testament to his dedication, his legal acumen, and his commitment to serving the public through the administration of justice.
Source: Justice Atul S Chandurkar of Bombay High Court among 3 elevated as Supreme Court judges