Supreme Court Justice Dipankar Datta on Saturday raised concerns over the opacity surrounding the functioning of the collegium which appoints judges to High Courts and the Supreme Court.

He was speaking at a conference organised by Indian Women in Law (IWiL) to celebrate Women's day.

The lack of transparency is such that even judges often have little clarity about how the collegium functions and where it meets, Justice Datta said.

“You will be surprised to know that not only we know what’s happening… we don’t even know where is the collegium sitting,” he remarked.

Judicial appointments must ultimately be guided by merit rather than numerical representation based on gender, he added.

He was speaking at a conference organised by Indian Women in Law (IWiL) to celebrate Women's day.

Justice Datta, who earlier served as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, said that during his tenure there, the absence of objective criteria meant that judges had to rely on their own assessment of advocates appearing before them.

“In Bombay High Court, since there was no objective criteria, we assessed performance of lawyers in front of us,” he said.

Referring to women who later became judges, he said:

“Justice Shampa Sarkar, Justice Amrita Sinha, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, the kind of grilling I did while I was there (Calcutta High Court)… now I am sure they can handle all the lawyers.”

Justice Datta cautioned against reducing the conversation on women’s representation in judiciary to merely numbers.

“When it comes to elevation as High Court judges, I won’t go for numbers. Not like out of 50 why can’t 25 go to women, why can’t 30 go? That is gender neutrality. We should go for merit.”

He said that the key factors for elevation to the Bench should be competence, integrity and temperament.

Justice Datta also recounted an instance from his time in the Bombay High Court when he declined a suggestion that a woman lawyer be recommended for elevation.

“One judge called me and said there are six being recommended. Why not the woman? I told that judge no. I said that lawyer appeared before me and she was immature and I need to give her time to mature.”

He added that not many judges in High Court Collegium are willing to resist such requests from the Supreme Court Collegium

“Not many judges have the courage to say no when a request is made from the Supreme Court. I told them it’s my decision. As a Chief Justice of the High Court, until I am satisfied I will not agree.”

Justice Datta also noted that dissent within the collegium does not necessarily alter the final outcome.

“There was a woman judge in the collegium recently and even though she dissented the appointment went through.”

He concluded by reiterating that representation should not become symbolic.

“I am against symbolic representation. If somebody is good to become a judge they should.”

The discussion was part of a session on women’s representation in the higher judiciary.

Former Jammu and Kashmir High Court Chief Justice Gita Mittal and High Court Justices Shampa Sarkar, and Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa also took part in the discussion.

The event was moderated by Senior Advocates Karuna Nundy and Uttara Babbar.

[Read Live Coverage]