Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Delay in Judicial Appointments: 70 Collegium Recommendations Pending

26-09-2023 : The Supreme Court has raised concerns over the delay in the appointment of judges, with 70 collegium recommendations pending with the government. During a hearing, the bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia expressed disappointment and urged the Attorney General, R Venkataramani, to take action to resolve the issue. The bench emphasized that it would not remain silent if the delay persisted and requested the Attorney General to provide instructions on the pending recommendations within a week. The court revealed that 70 recommendations were still pending, including transfers, reiterations, and appointments of the Chief Justice to a sensitive high court, all of which have been awaiting action since November of the previous year.

Justice Kaul, who is part of the apex court collegium responsible for judicial appointments, emphasized that the delay had created a seven-month hiatus in addressing these pending recommendations, which only required basic processing. The court stated that it would closely monitor progress on this matter and would continue to address it regularly to ensure substantial work is done before the end of the year.

The appointment of judges through the collegium system has been a contentious issue between the Supreme Court and the Centre in the past, drawing criticism from various quarters. The court was hearing a petition filed by the Advocates Association of Bengaluru, seeking contempt action against the Union Ministry of Law and Justice for allegedly not adhering to the timeline set by the court in a 2021 judgment.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing NGO Common Cause during the hearing, submitted a chart detailing the pending recommendations with the government. He expressed concern that even after a batch of names is recommended by the collegium, the government segregates them and makes selective appointments, affecting the morale of lawyers. Some lawyers have withdrawn their consents due to the ongoing uncertainty. The court agreed with Bhushan’s concerns and noted that nine names were pending without being reverted back to the collegium.

Senior advocate Arvind Dattar, representing the petitioner ‘The Advocates Association of Bengaluru,’ and Bhushan emphasized the need for a “hard push” to ensure that the Centre adheres to the timeline. The court acknowledged that candidates had lost interest and withdrawn their names due to the delay in appointments, affecting their seniority. It expressed its commitment to addressing the issue every 10 days and urged the Attorney General to resolve the matter promptly.

The Supreme Court had previously instructed the Centre to ensure that most of the recommended actions concerning the appointment and transfer of judges are completed. It had also expressed displeasure over the delay in clearing recommendations for the transfer of high court judges, considering it a very serious issue. One of the pleas before the apex court alleges “wilful disobedience” of the timeline set down in its April 20, 2021, order to facilitate the timely appointment of judges. The court had specified that the Centre should appoint judges within three to four weeks if the collegium unanimously reiterated its recommendations.