Master of Roster controversy in Nepal Supreme Court; judges demand resignation of CJ Cholendra Shumsher Rana

Crisis has hit the Supreme Court of Nepal, with all its judges demanding the resignation of Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana after grave allegations of corruption and misuse of powers were raised against him. .According to The Kathmandu Post, 19 judges have been demanding the resignation of the Chief Justice and have been hearing only Habeas Corpus petitions for the past two weeks..Importantly, two prominent Bar bodies - the Nepal Bar Association and the Supreme Court Bar Association - have also thrown their weight behind the judges in demanding that the Chief Justice step down. According to the Himalayan Times, one of the allegations against the Chief Justice was that he got his brother-in-law appointed to the cabinet as a quid pro quo with the executive.It was also alleged that as the master of roster, he assigned certain cases to his own bench or to benches over which he could have some control. One of the judges had suggested that an automated system of allocating cases should be introduced so that the bias of the Chief Justice will not affect allocation of cases. However, that proposal has not been implemented yet.Further, it was alleged that the CJ delayed the hearing of politically sensitive cases and also created obstruction in the adjudication of corruption cases by not filling posts of judges in the special court tasked with hearing such cases. .The allegations against Chief Justice Rana bear a striking resemblance to the allegations that were raised against former Chief Justices of India including Dipak Misra and Ranjan Gogoi.CJI Misra was accused of misusing his master of roster powers to allocate sensitive cases, particularly those involving the ruling dispensation, to favourable Benches..In fact, he had even sat on a Constitution Bench and given a verdict stating that the CJI is the master of roster with the exclusive power to constitute benches and allocate cases to the benches.This had led to a press conference by four senior judges of the Supreme Court criticising the same and demanding greater transparency in the manner in which cases are allotted.Interestingly, one of the four judges who held the press conference, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, attracted greater controversy after he became the CJI, by getting embroiled in a sexual harassment case. After his retirement, he was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by the government..However, unlike in Nepal, where the Bar bodies have been standing against the CJ, the Bar in India has largely been divided over such issues. The apex Bar body, the Bar Council of India, has consistently thrown its weight behind the CJIs and also criticised judges and lawyers who spoke out against CJIs.