Supreme Court cross at sniping by ex-collegium members

Express News Service

NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court bench on Friday took a swipe at a number of former collegium members who’ve been vocal of their criticism of the system, observing it has now turn into a vogue for them to take action after retirement.

Justice M R Shah, who’s presently a part of the collegium headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud stated, “We don’t want to comment upon anything made by former members (of the collegium). Now it has become a fashion to comment upon decisions made by earlier members.”

The remarks had been made by the bench whereas contemplating a plea by RTI activist Anjali Bharadwaj, who sought the agenda, minutes and determination of a Supreme Court collegium assembly on December 12, 2018, below the RTI Act. The SC got here below the RTI Act in late 2019.

According to the autobiography of former CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice for the Judge, the collegium had agreed in its December 2018 assembly to suggest the names of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, who was then the Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, the then Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, for elevation to the Supreme Court however the resolution was saved in abeyance because the information of their elevation had leaked.

Apart from CJI Gogoi, the opposite members of the then collegium had been justices Madan B Lokur, A Okay Sikri, S A Bobde and N V Ramana. The decision of the following collegium assembly on January 10, 2019, recorded that the choices taken on December 12, 2018, had been revisited and overturned “in the light of additional materials”.

Terming Bharadwaj’s plea as a “fishing inquiry by a busy body”, Justice Shah stated, “Let the system which is functioning not be derailed. Let the collegium perform its duty.” On advocate Prashant Bhushan’s submission that the SC was itself backfiring after declaring the Right to Information as a basic proper, the bench rebutted it saying, “We’re the most transparent institution. We’re not backfiring.”

In February 2019, Bharadwaj had filed an RTI request searching for a duplicate of the minutes of the decision of the SC collegium’s December, 2018 assembly. While the Central Public Information Officer had dismissed the plea, the primary appellate authority noticed that the January 10, 2019 collegium decision had made it clear that no decision was formally handed within the December assembly since consultations couldn’t be accomplished. She equally hit a wall on the Central Information Commission and the Delhi excessive court docket earlier than she introduced it to the SC. The bench reserved its orders on the plea.

Justice Lokur expressed disappointment
After retirement, Justice Lokur had in a media interview expressed his disappointment on the SC not importing its December 2018 collegium decision. But the Delhi High Court refused to think about it

NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court bench on Friday took a swipe at a number of former collegium members who’ve been vocal of their criticism of the system, observing it has now turn into a vogue for them to take action after retirement.

Justice M R Shah, who’s presently a part of the collegium headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud stated, “We don’t want to comment upon anything made by former members (of the collegium). Now it has become a fashion to comment upon decisions made by earlier members.”

The remarks had been made by the bench whereas contemplating a plea by RTI activist Anjali Bharadwaj, who sought the agenda, minutes and determination of a Supreme Court collegium assembly on December 12, 2018, below the RTI Act. The SC got here below the RTI Act in late 2019.

According to the autobiography of former CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice for the Judge, the collegium had agreed in its December 2018 assembly to suggest the names of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, who was then the Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, the then Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, for elevation to the Supreme Court however the resolution was saved in abeyance because the information of their elevation had leaked.

Apart from CJI Gogoi, the opposite members of the then collegium had been justices Madan B Lokur, A Okay Sikri, S A Bobde and N V Ramana. The decision of the following collegium assembly on January 10, 2019, recorded that the choices taken on December 12, 2018, had been revisited and overturned “in the light of additional materials”.

Terming Bharadwaj’s plea as a “fishing inquiry by a busy body”, Justice Shah stated, “Let the system which is functioning not be derailed. Let the collegium perform its duty.” On advocate Prashant Bhushan’s submission that the SC was itself backfiring after declaring the Right to Information as a basic proper, the bench rebutted it saying, “We’re the most transparent institution. We’re not backfiring.”

In February 2019, Bharadwaj had filed an RTI request searching for a duplicate of the minutes of the decision of the SC collegium’s December, 2018 assembly. While the Central Public Information Officer had dismissed the plea, the primary appellate authority noticed that the January 10, 2019 collegium decision had made it clear that no decision was formally handed within the December assembly since consultations couldn’t be accomplished. She equally hit a wall on the Central Information Commission and the Delhi excessive court docket earlier than she introduced it to the SC. The bench reserved its orders on the plea.

Justice Lokur expressed disappointment
After retirement, Justice Lokur had in a media interview expressed his disappointment on the SC not importing its December 2018 collegium decision. But the Delhi High Court refused to think about it