THE ALLAHABAD High Court has directed the counsel for the High Court to produce the report of a committee, comprising three judges of this court, which made a recommendation to the Collegium to appoint Dr. Justice Satish Chandra as a judge of the court .
A division bench of the court issued this directive while hearing a writ petition challenging the appointment of Dr. Justice Chandra as a judge of the High Court.
The bench passed this order, when the counsel for the High Court informed it that the High Court had declined to produce the committee’s report for perusal of the bench even in a sealed cover, despite the understanding that the report would not be made public.
The division bench , comprising Justice Sushil Harkauli and Justice Vikram Nath, while taking a serious note of this refusal, observed,” We are unable to comprehend any plausible reasons for this unusual stand taken by the High Court. Therefore , having regard to the need to maintain public confidence in this institution, particularly in the present times, we have little option except to pass this order, directing that the report be produced before this court on September 25, 2008.
The court made it clear that if the High Court proposes to claim privilege or raise any other objection to the production of the report, it will be open to the High Court to do so, but in writing by way of an application. If such an application is moved on or before September 25, it will not be necessary for the High Court to produce the committee’s report unless those objections are heard and disposed of , the court further said.
Earlier, during the course of the hearing, the court had on September 10, directed that the record of the collegium proceedings relating to the recommendation regarding Justice Dr. Chandra’s elevation as a judge of this court be produced before the court in a sealed cover for the court’s perusal.
The collegium , consists of the Chief Justice and two senior most judges, who recommend the names of persons to be appointed as judges of the High Court.
On September 12, the collegium proceedings were produced before the court. A perusal of the recommendation made by the collegium indicated that the recommendation of the persons proposed to be elevated from ‘service’, including Dr. Justice Satish Chandra, was made by the collegium on the recommendation of a committee of three judges.
On this, the court directed that the report of the three judge committee be produced before the court in a sealed cover.
However, when on September 17, the counsel for the High Court said the High Court had declined to produce the committee’s report, the court passed the present order.
High Lawyer M.C. Gupta, through Senior Advocate Ravi Kiran Jain, has challenged the appointment of Dr. Justice Satish Chandra as judge of this High Court on the ground that he lacked essential qualifications for the appointment, as well as lack of effective consultation between the constitutional functionaries whose consultation is mandatory under Article 217 of the Constitution of India.
According to the petitioner, Dr. Justice Chandra does not have ten years’ of legal practice, nor is he a member of judicial services, which are essential for being appointed as a judge of the High Court.