Justice Chelameswar seeks full court discussion on govt interference

In a five-page letter to CJI and 22 other judges, Justice Chelameswar states that govt has been selective in accepting recommendations of the SC Collegium for the appointment of judges to high courts

Justice Jasti Chelameswar, the number-two judge in Supreme Court pecking order, last week wrote to Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, seeking a full court on the judicial side to discuss the matter of government interference in the appointment of judges to high courts, The Indian Express has reported.
 
Justice Chelameshwar questioned an enquiry initiated by Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari against a district judge P Krishna Bhat recommended twice by the Supreme Court collegium for elevation to the High Court without first referring the matter to the CJI, according to media reports.
 
According to the Indian express report, CJI Misra has not responded to the letter yet.

 

In a five-page letter, Justice Chelameswar states that the government has been selective in accepting recommendations of the Supreme Court Collegium for the appointment of judges to high courts. The letter, apparently, also states that the government chooses to ignore or defer the names it finds uncomfortable; this affects the independence of the judiciary.
 
Here are some of the ket takeaways from Justice Chelameswar’s letter to CJI and other 22 judges

Objection to Maheshwari’s decision to probe old allegations levelled against Bhat: In his letter, copies of which were marked to 22 other SC judges, Chelameswar is learnt to have taken serious objection to Maheshwari’s decision to probe old allegations levelled against Bhat by a female judicial officer despite his predecessor absolving him after a thorough probe.

 
He also questioned the propriety of the law ministry writing directly to the high court chief justice for a probe against Bhat on the basis of a complaint sent by the woman, who had earlier been indicted by Bhat after an inquiry conducted on the orders of the high court.
 
The Case against Karnataka district judge P Krishna Bhat: After lawyers practising in a Karnataka district court complained against the conduct of a female judicial officer, the HC had asked Bhat to conduct an inquiry.
 
In his report, Bhat indicted the female judge. ThePrint quotted the sources that the female judicial officer had even refused to pay heed to the administrative judge in charge of her district, and walked out of a meeting.

She first filed a written complaint against Bhat only after the administrative committee of the HC sought her explanation. She accused Bhat of “atrocities and abuse of power”. After being indicted, she put in her papers, only to withdraw her resignation within days.
 
The complaint: However, after the HC collegium recommended Bhat, the most senior district judge at the time, for elevation to the HC bench, she started sending complaints against him to the Centre and the Supreme Court, accusing him of misbehaviour and targeting her. After receiving her complaint, the Centre returned the recommendation of the SC collegium to elevate Bhat. The then CJI T.S. Thakur subsequently asked Maheshwari’s predecessor, Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, to hold an inquiry.

 
In his report, filed in November 2016, Mukherjee gave a clean chit to Bhat, saying the woman’s complaint was without basis, and aimed at maligning Bhat and stalling his appointment as HC judge. He termed the allegations “incorrect and concocted”.
 
Thereafter, in April last year, the SC collegium reiterated its recommendation, but the Modi government has yet to act on it. Under the memorandum of procedure (MoP), the Centre has no option but to process the case once the collegium reiterates its recommendation.