Expression of views does not disentitle candidate from holding constitutional publish: SC Collegium

By PTI

NEW DELHI: Expression of views by a candidate proposed for judgeship doesn’t disentitle him from holding a constitutional publish so long as he has competence, advantage and integrity, the Supreme Court Collegium has mentioned whereas reiterating its suggestion for the appointment of advocate Somasekhar Sundaresan as a decide of the Bombay High Court.

The three-member Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and in addition comprising Justices S Ok Kaul and Ok M Joseph, famous the apex courtroom physique had beneficial Sundaresan’s title for judgeship on February 16 final 12 months and, on November 25, 2022, the federal government had sought reconsideration.

“The ground on which reconsideration of the candidature of Shri Sundaresan has been sought is that he has aired his views in the social media on several matters which are the subject matter of consideration before the courts,” mentioned an announcement uploaded on the apex courtroom web site.

It mentioned, “Having considered the objection to the candidature of Shri Somasekhar Sundaresan, the Collegium is of the view that the views on social media attributed to the candidate, do not furnish any foundation to infer that he is biased.”

It mentioned the problems on which opinions have been attributed to him are within the public area and have been extensively deliberated upon within the media.

“The manner in which the candidate has expressed his views does not justify the inference that he is a ‘highly biased opinionated person’ or that he has been ‘selectively critical on the social media on the important policies, initiatives and directions of the Government’ (as indicated in the objections of Department of Justice) nor is there any material to indicate that the expressions used by the candidate are suggestive of his links with any political party with strong ideological leanings,” the assertion mentioned.

It mentioned all residents have the precise to free speech and expression beneath Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

“Expression of views by a candidate does not disentitle him to hold a constitutional office so long as the person proposed for judgeship is a person of competence, merit and integrity,” the assertion mentioned.

ALSO READ | Govt cannot repeatedly ship again proposals, says SC Collegium

It mentioned Sundaresan has specialised in industrial regulation and can be an “asset” to the Bombay High Court which has a big quantity of circumstances of business and securities legal guidelines, amongst different branches.

“The Department of Justice has adverted to paragraph 175 of the Second Judges Case to the effect that the candidate to be selected must possess high integrity, honesty, skill, high order of emotional stability, firmness, serenity, legal soundness, ability and endurance. The candidate fulfils these qualities,” the assertion mentioned.

It mentioned the Collegium is of the thought of view that Sundaresan deserves to be appointed as a decide of the Bombay High Court.

“The Collegium, therefore, resolves to reiterate its recommendation dated February 16, 2022, for appointment of Shri Somasekhar Sundaresan, advocate, as judge of the Bombay High Court,” it mentioned.

The assertion additionally famous that the Collegium of the Bombay High Court had on October 4, 2021, beneficial Sundaresan’s elevation.

The prime courtroom has usually voiced displeasure over the alleged delay by the Centre in clearing the names beneficial by the Collegium for appointment as judges to the Supreme Court and excessive courts.

At a listening to on January 6, the apex courtroom had mentioned it’s a “matter of concern” that the federal government is sending again the names reiterated by the Collegium for judgeship in constitutional courts regardless of there being nothing within the current situation to stop the appointment publish reiteration.

ALSO READ | ‘Collegium law of the land, has to be followed’: SC raps Centre over NJAC 

NEW DELHI: Expression of views by a candidate proposed for judgeship doesn’t disentitle him from holding a constitutional publish so long as he has competence, advantage and integrity, the Supreme Court Collegium has mentioned whereas reiterating its suggestion for the appointment of advocate Somasekhar Sundaresan as a decide of the Bombay High Court.

The three-member Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and in addition comprising Justices S Ok Kaul and Ok M Joseph, famous the apex courtroom physique had beneficial Sundaresan’s title for judgeship on February 16 final 12 months and, on November 25, 2022, the federal government had sought reconsideration.

“The ground on which reconsideration of the candidature of Shri Sundaresan has been sought is that he has aired his views in the social media on several matters which are the subject matter of consideration before the courts,” mentioned an announcement uploaded on the apex courtroom web site.

It mentioned, “Having considered the objection to the candidature of Shri Somasekhar Sundaresan, the Collegium is of the view that the views on social media attributed to the candidate, do not furnish any foundation to infer that he is biased.”

It mentioned the problems on which opinions have been attributed to him are within the public area and have been extensively deliberated upon within the media.

“The manner in which the candidate has expressed his views does not justify the inference that he is a ‘highly biased opinionated person’ or that he has been ‘selectively critical on the social media on the important policies, initiatives and directions of the Government’ (as indicated in the objections of Department of Justice) nor is there any material to indicate that the expressions used by the candidate are suggestive of his links with any political party with strong ideological leanings,” the assertion mentioned.

It mentioned all residents have the precise to free speech and expression beneath Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

“Expression of views by a candidate does not disentitle him to hold a constitutional office so long as the person proposed for judgeship is a person of competence, merit and integrity,” the assertion mentioned.

ALSO READ | Govt cannot repeatedly ship again proposals, says SC Collegium

It mentioned Sundaresan has specialised in industrial regulation and can be an “asset” to the Bombay High Court which has a big quantity of circumstances of business and securities legal guidelines, amongst different branches.

“The Department of Justice has adverted to paragraph 175 of the Second Judges Case to the effect that the candidate to be selected must possess high integrity, honesty, skill, high order of emotional stability, firmness, serenity, legal soundness, ability and endurance. The candidate fulfils these qualities,” the assertion mentioned.

It mentioned the Collegium is of the thought of view that Sundaresan deserves to be appointed as a decide of the Bombay High Court.

“The Collegium, therefore, resolves to reiterate its recommendation dated February 16, 2022, for appointment of Shri Somasekhar Sundaresan, advocate, as judge of the Bombay High Court,” it mentioned.

The assertion additionally famous that the Collegium of the Bombay High Court had on October 4, 2021, beneficial Sundaresan’s elevation.

The prime courtroom has usually voiced displeasure over the alleged delay by the Centre in clearing the names beneficial by the Collegium for appointment as judges to the Supreme Court and excessive courts.

At a listening to on January 6, the apex courtroom had mentioned it’s a “matter of concern” that the federal government is sending again the names reiterated by the Collegium for judgeship in constitutional courts regardless of there being nothing within the current situation to stop the appointment publish reiteration.

ALSO READ | ‘Collegium law of the land, has to be followed’: SC raps Centre over NJAC