The Supreme Court on Monday took critical note of the recalcitrant attitude of the government when it comes to appointing High Court judges..The Court made the observation while dismissing appeals preferred by the Central government and the Indian Solar Manufacturers Association (ISMA) in a case. .A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed that ideally the Court would have asked parties to approach the High Court in the matter, but it was not doing so since High Courts are manned with less than half the sanctioned strength..The top Court noted that the issues raised in the case arose partly "on account of the recalcitrant attitude of the Government in not appointing High Court Judges for years together even where the recommendations have been cleared by the Collegium.".The Court went ahead to state that the government must realize that early adjudication of commercial disputes is a necessity for which there has to be adequate number of Judges..The case concerned an investigation by the government arising from anti-dumping proceedings..The Centre stated that while issuing notice, the Delhi High Court had not recorded reasons. The Centre informed that only the plea made on behalf of the original petitioners have been recorded in the order. The counsel appearing for another party aggrieved, the ISMA, submitted that there may be a possibility of irreparable loss if the appeal is not entertained..However, the apex Court declined to entertain the appeals, observing that the stage of notice can hardly be a stage where the Supreme Court of the country should be asked to step in.."The real rub is in the fact that the High Court does not find it feasible to accommodate such matters at an early date. This is the direct result of there being inadequacies of the number of High Court Judges including in the capital of the Country where the Delhi High Court is located," the Court went on to observe..The Supreme Court noted that the judicial institution is faced with this scenario despite a timeline being laid down for the appointment of judges by the top Court's order in M/s. PLR Projects Pvt. Ltd. V. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited & Ors., which, it was observed "appears to not have moved the Government.".It may be recalled that in April 2021, the top Court, for the first time, indicated an outer time limit within which the Central government is expected to process the names for appointment to the High Court, besides notifying the appointments once the names are reiterated by the Collegium..The existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) that guides judicial appointments has not suggested any period within which the Centre is supposed to forward the recommendations to the Supreme Court Collegium. However, a Bench headed by former Chief Justice of India SA Bobde set down 18 weeks as the time to complete this process..On Monday, the Court pointed out to the Central government that the recommendations for Judge-appointments take months and years to reach the Collegium, and thereafter, for months and years, no decisions are taken post the Collegium stage.."Delhi High Court will be with less than 50% Judges in a week’s time having only 29 Judges out of a strength of 60 Judges while two decades back when one of us (Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul) was appointed as a Judge it was as the 32nd Judge of Court whereas the strength was 33 Judges," the Court further highlighted..The top Court went on to observe that the "factual matrix paints an even a sorrier picture of the Government’s conduct.".In this regard, it was noted that the the High Court, conscious of the urgency of the matter, while issuing notice on on June 4, 2021, had called upon counter affidavits to be filed within four weeks and listed the matter on July 19, 2021. However, a delay on the Centre's part led to the matter being adjourned by the High Court till October.."We are informed that the Government did not filed the counter affidavits and took further four weeks’ time to file the counter affidavits necessitating the adjournment till 05th October, 2021. And the special leave petition was filed on 17.7.2021. Thus on one hand, the Government does not deem it expedient to even file the counter affidavits while it has the ability to draw the special leave petitions and file the same before this Court. So much for the urgency expressed by the Government of India in the present proceedings!" the Supreme Court observed. .With these observations, the Court dismissed the appeals. .[Read Order]
The Supreme Court on Monday took critical note of the recalcitrant attitude of the government when it comes to appointing High Court judges..The Court made the observation while dismissing appeals preferred by the Central government and the Indian Solar Manufacturers Association (ISMA) in a case. .A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed that ideally the Court would have asked parties to approach the High Court in the matter, but it was not doing so since High Courts are manned with less than half the sanctioned strength..The top Court noted that the issues raised in the case arose partly "on account of the recalcitrant attitude of the Government in not appointing High Court Judges for years together even where the recommendations have been cleared by the Collegium.".The Court went ahead to state that the government must realize that early adjudication of commercial disputes is a necessity for which there has to be adequate number of Judges..The case concerned an investigation by the government arising from anti-dumping proceedings..The Centre stated that while issuing notice, the Delhi High Court had not recorded reasons. The Centre informed that only the plea made on behalf of the original petitioners have been recorded in the order. The counsel appearing for another party aggrieved, the ISMA, submitted that there may be a possibility of irreparable loss if the appeal is not entertained..However, the apex Court declined to entertain the appeals, observing that the stage of notice can hardly be a stage where the Supreme Court of the country should be asked to step in.."The real rub is in the fact that the High Court does not find it feasible to accommodate such matters at an early date. This is the direct result of there being inadequacies of the number of High Court Judges including in the capital of the Country where the Delhi High Court is located," the Court went on to observe..The Supreme Court noted that the judicial institution is faced with this scenario despite a timeline being laid down for the appointment of judges by the top Court's order in M/s. PLR Projects Pvt. Ltd. V. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited & Ors., which, it was observed "appears to not have moved the Government.".It may be recalled that in April 2021, the top Court, for the first time, indicated an outer time limit within which the Central government is expected to process the names for appointment to the High Court, besides notifying the appointments once the names are reiterated by the Collegium..The existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) that guides judicial appointments has not suggested any period within which the Centre is supposed to forward the recommendations to the Supreme Court Collegium. However, a Bench headed by former Chief Justice of India SA Bobde set down 18 weeks as the time to complete this process..On Monday, the Court pointed out to the Central government that the recommendations for Judge-appointments take months and years to reach the Collegium, and thereafter, for months and years, no decisions are taken post the Collegium stage.."Delhi High Court will be with less than 50% Judges in a week’s time having only 29 Judges out of a strength of 60 Judges while two decades back when one of us (Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul) was appointed as a Judge it was as the 32nd Judge of Court whereas the strength was 33 Judges," the Court further highlighted..The top Court went on to observe that the "factual matrix paints an even a sorrier picture of the Government’s conduct.".In this regard, it was noted that the the High Court, conscious of the urgency of the matter, while issuing notice on on June 4, 2021, had called upon counter affidavits to be filed within four weeks and listed the matter on July 19, 2021. However, a delay on the Centre's part led to the matter being adjourned by the High Court till October.."We are informed that the Government did not filed the counter affidavits and took further four weeks’ time to file the counter affidavits necessitating the adjournment till 05th October, 2021. And the special leave petition was filed on 17.7.2021. Thus on one hand, the Government does not deem it expedient to even file the counter affidavits while it has the ability to draw the special leave petitions and file the same before this Court. So much for the urgency expressed by the Government of India in the present proceedings!" the Supreme Court observed. .With these observations, the Court dismissed the appeals. .[Read Order]
