The elevation of one of the two jurists recommended by the collegium as Supreme Court judges on Thursday, 26 April, evoked a sharp reaction, with former Finance Minister P Chidambaram questioning if the Modi government was above the law.
Meanwhile, Subramanian Swamy, BJP leader and a regular petitioner at the Supreme Court, said that the Congress’ stand on the issue reflected its frustration.
"On one hand, they accuse the CJI being inclined to BJP and on the other, they are saying we have ignored him. The Congress party is just frustrated," he said.
Dealing a major blow to the Modi government, a bench headed by Uttarakhand High Court Chief Justice KM Joseph in 2016 had quashed the imposition of President rule in the state and had revived the Congress government headed by Harish Rawat. Later, the Congress lost the Assembly election.
The reactions of Chidambaram and others come amidst reports that the government had cleared the appointment of senior advocate Indu Malhotra as a judge of the Supreme Court, but not that of Joseph.
Malhotra will be the first woman judge to be appointed to the top post directly from the bar.
Meanwhile, law ministry sources say that the government has asked the collegium to reconsider the recommendation to elevate Justice Joseph as a judge of the top court.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Vikas Singh, speaking in his individual capacity, expressed concern over the delay in the appointment of Justice Joseph and said "this kind of interference by the executive is definitely uncalled for."
This elevation is very wrong as it disturbs the seniority in the Supreme Court. We have seen in recent past how important seniority is in the apex court. Judges are being labelled as junior judges and said that they were not fit to hear sensitive matters. So tomorrow if somebody says Justice Joseph is a junior judge and not fit to hear a particular matter, it will be very sad.
"Government will be responsible. This kind of interference by the executive is definitely uncalled for. By delaying this, they have definitely interfered in seniority rules and in that sense they have interfered in the functioning of judiciary. A very serious matter. The civil society and the judges of the Supreme Court in full court should discuss and take it up with the government," Singh told PTI.
Activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan shared Singh’s views, and was vocal in criticising the Centre, alleging that the government was trying to erode and destroy the independence of judiciary by not appointing those recommended by the collegium.
"Justice KM Joseph's instance is a very clear one, whose name has been stalled, which was recommended by the collegium four months ago. The name was unanimously recommended by the collegium and yet it has been stalled by the government because he gave a judgment in Uttarakhand case against the government.
"It is very shameful and shocking for a government which talks about the independence of judiciary to try and erode the independence of judiciary by sitting on appointment of people that it doesn't like," Bhushan said.
On 22 January, the apex court collegium's file recommending the elevation of Justice Joseph and Malhotra reached the law ministry.
After processing the file in the first week of February, the recommendations were kept in abeyance as the government wanted to elevate only Malhotra. But now, the government has gone ahead with the appointment of Malhotra and asked the collegium to reconsider the elevation of Joseph.
The government feels that while recommending the name of Joseph, the collegium has disregarded seniority and regional representation. He is 42nd in the seniority list of 669 high court judges.
(With inputs from PTI)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)