Government's cherry picking of Collegium's recommendations continues unabated
Judging from the manner in which appointments of judges to High courts are made from among the recommendations of the Collegium, it would appear that the Government have the power to determine the seniority of judges on the all Indian list and in the High Court. This has in the past led to frustration among proposed appointees sometimes leading them to withdraw their consent to be Judges. Apart from allowing for manipulation in the matter of appointments, it could lead to loss of talent and diversity on the Bench.
Published on: 13 February 2025, 02:08 pm
On Wednesday, the Union government cleared some pending recommendations for the appointment of judges to the high courts. At the same time it continued to exercise its pocket veto against certain names.
On February 12 the Union government appointed advocate Tejas Dhirenbhai Karia, to the Delhi High Court while holding back the appointment of advocate Ms. Shwetasree Majumder who was recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium for appointment to the same High Court prior to Karia for judgeship to the Delhi High Court.
Karia is a Partner with the Dispute Resolution Practice at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas and also heads the Firm’s Arbitration Practice. Perhaps, it is the first time that a person from a firm is appointed as judge. His wife Manisha Karia is a senior advocate at the Supreme Court of India. Karia’s brother is also a judge at the Gujarat High Court.
On August 21, 2024, the Collegium comprising the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhanajaya Y. Chandrachud, the present CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice B.R. Gavai had recommended Ms. Majumder along with advocates Ajay Digpaul and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar.
The government's selective approach to the recommendations of the collegium has continued unabated.
Karia was recommended for appointment to the Delhi High Court on August 29, 2024.
On January 8 this year, the government appointed both Advocate Digpaul and Shankar as judges of the Delhi High Court while withholding appointment of Ms. Majumder.
The Collegium while recommending Ms. Majumder’s name for judgeship had noted that she had extensive practice of more than 21 years and vast experience in civil matters, particularly intellectual property rights, technology, advertising and trade secret matters, which make her a valuable addition to the judiciary
The Collegium also stated that her elevation would promote diversity and inclusivity on the Bench of the High Court.
On February 12, the Union government appointed advocate Tejas Dhirenbhai Karia to the Delhi High Court while holding back the appointment of advocate Ms. Shwetasree Majumder.
“The expertise of the candidate in the area of Intellectual Property Rights is of significant importance in view of the pendency of such matters in the High Court which are being dealt with by a dedicated IP Division. The candidate has substantial practice which is reflected in 35 reported judgments delivered in the cases in which she appeared/argued and her average net 4 professional income is Rs. 183.56 lakhs per annum during the last five years”, the Collegium had said.
Going forward, assuming Ms. Majumder is appointed in the future as judge of the Delhi High Court, she will be junior to Karia, something that collegium had not envisioned.
On February 5, the Collegium recommended the names of two judicial officers for their elevation as judges to the Delhi High Court. If their appointments are cleared before the appointment of Ms. Majumder, her inter-se seniority will go below all those appointed before her.
The government yesterday cleared a few more names, which have been gathering dust at the Department of Justice.
The names of advocates Harmeet Singh Grewal and Deepinder Singh Nalwa have been cleared for appointment as judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.