 |
|
The article highlights a critical aspect of the Indian judicial system: the appointment of High Court judges and the ongoing interaction between the Supreme Court Collegium and the Central Government in this process. The data released by the Supreme Court reveals that 29 recommendations made by the Collegium, spanning from November 9, 2022, to May 5, 2025, are currently pending with the Central Government. This delay raises concerns about the efficiency and potential impediments within the judicial appointment mechanism. The details of these pending recommendations include the names of the individuals recommended and the specific High Courts they are intended for, such as Madras, Allahabad, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana, Gauhati, Kerala, Delhi, Bombay, Patna, Calcutta, Rajasthan, and Gujarat. The sheer number of pending recommendations underscores the significance of the issue and its potential impact on the functioning of the High Courts. The delay in appointments can lead to increased workload for existing judges, backlog of cases, and ultimately, affect the delivery of justice to the citizens. It is crucial to analyze the underlying reasons for these delays and to identify potential solutions to streamline the appointment process. The transparency exhibited by the Supreme Court in publishing this data is commendable, as it allows for public scrutiny and informed discussions on the matter. This transparency also holds both the Collegium and the Central Government accountable for their respective roles in the appointment process. Further investigation into the specific reasons for the pendency of each recommendation is warranted, as there may be various factors contributing to the delays, such as security clearances, background checks, or disagreements between the Collegium and the government. Addressing these issues will require a collaborative approach and a commitment to upholding the independence and integrity of the judiciary.
The article also provides insights into the diversity and inclusivity aspects of the judicial appointment process. Out of 303 proposals received, the Supreme Court Collegium approved 170 appointments for High Courts, including representatives from various marginalized communities. Specifically, 7 judges were from Scheduled Castes, 5 from Scheduled Tribes, 21 from Other Backward Classes (OBC), 28 women, 23 minorities, and 12 were related to judges, with 7 from the Most Backward Classes. This data suggests that the Collegium is actively working towards ensuring representation from different social groups within the judiciary. However, it is important to note that the representation of these groups may still be disproportionate to their share in the overall population. Further efforts are needed to address any systemic biases or barriers that may hinder the appointment of qualified candidates from marginalized communities. The inclusion of women judges is particularly significant, as it promotes gender equality and can bring diverse perspectives to the judicial decision-making process. Similarly, the representation of minorities and backward classes is essential for building a more inclusive and representative judiciary that reflects the diversity of Indian society. The data from CJI Sanjiv Khanna's term, from November 2024 to May 5, shows that the Collegium approved 51 appointments for High Courts out of 103 candidates. Among these, 11 belonged to OBC, 1 to Scheduled Caste, 2 to Scheduled Tribes, 8 were from Minorities, 6 were women, and 2 were related to sitting or retired judges of High Courts or the Supreme Court. These figures indicate a continuation of the Collegium's efforts to promote diversity and inclusion in judicial appointments. However, the fact that some of these recommendations are still pending with the government suggests that challenges remain in ensuring timely and effective implementation of the Collegium's decisions.
The article highlights the concern regarding pending recommendations and criticizes the Union Government for delays and the practice of splitting up collegium resolutions. The Supreme Court has previously expressed its disapproval of the government's inaction on collegium decisions, emphasizing the importance of timely appointments to maintain the efficiency and integrity of the judiciary. The Court has also criticized the practice of the Centre splitting up collegium resolutions, arguing that it disrupts the seniority of judges and can undermine the overall judicial system. This practice can lead to uncertainty and instability within the judiciary, as judges may be unsure of their future career prospects and may be less likely to take bold or independent decisions. The article mentions that among the several pending recommendations, the Centre cleared certain other proposals in the same collegium resolution. This selective clearance of recommendations further raises questions about the government's rationale and potential biases in the appointment process. The lack of transparency in the government's decision-making process can erode public trust in the judiciary and create perceptions of political interference. To address these concerns, it is essential to establish clear and transparent guidelines for the government's review of collegium recommendations. These guidelines should specify the criteria used to assess candidates and the timelines for completing the review process. The government should also provide detailed reasons for any rejections or delays in the appointment of judges. This would ensure that the appointment process is fair, impartial, and free from political influence. Ultimately, a collaborative and constructive dialogue between the Supreme Court Collegium and the Central Government is necessary to resolve the issues surrounding judicial appointments and to ensure that the judiciary remains independent, efficient, and accountable.
In conclusion, the article sheds light on the ongoing challenges in the appointment of High Court judges in India. The pendency of recommendations, the need for greater diversity and inclusion, and the concerns regarding government delays and interference all underscore the importance of reforming the judicial appointment process. A more transparent, efficient, and collaborative approach is needed to ensure that the judiciary is equipped with the best possible talent and that it can effectively serve the interests of justice. The data presented in the article provides valuable insights into the current state of affairs and can serve as a basis for informed discussions and policy interventions aimed at strengthening the Indian judicial system. It is imperative for all stakeholders, including the Supreme Court Collegium, the Central Government, and civil society organizations, to work together to address the challenges and to build a more robust and independent judiciary.