Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).13/2015
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondent(s) WITH T.P.(C) No.391/2015 T.P.(C)No.971/2015 W.P.(C)No.341/2015 [HEARD BY: HON'BLE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR,HON'BLE J. CHELAMESWAR, HON'BLE MADAN B. LOKUR, HON'BLE KURIAN JOSEPH AND HON'BLE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, JJ.] JUDGMENT Date : 16/12/2015 These petitions were called on for
pronouncement of Orders today.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Surya Kant, Adv. In WP 13/2015 Mr. Dushyant Parashazr, Adv.
Mr. Pranav Vyas, Adv.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, AOR In WP 23/2015
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Santosh Paul, Adv. In WP 70/2015 Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR In WP 83/2015
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil B.Divan, Sr. Adv. In WP 108/2015 Mr.Prashant Kumar, Adv.
Ms.Anindita Pujari, Adv.
Mr. Syed Rehan, Adv.
Mr.Ranvir Singh, Adv.
Mr.Jitendra Kr.Mohapatra, Adv.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR
Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., AOR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.M.Duraiswamy, in person(NP)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Subhasish Bhowmick, AOR
For Petitioner(s) Mr.Rabin Majumder, AOR
In TP(C) 971/15 Ms.Prachi Bajpai, Adv.
In WP(C) 341/15 Mr.Ankur S.Kulkarni, AOR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, in person (NP)in WP 14/2015 JUDGMENT
For Petitioner(s) Mr. R.K. Kapoor, in person(NP)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya,in person(NP)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajiv Daiya, in person(NP)
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.S. Narasimha, ASG (UOI) Ms. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv. and for Mrs. Devanashi P, Adv.
petitioners Mr.Nikhil Rohatgi, Adv. In TP 391/2015 Mr.Sameer Rohatgi, Adv.
Mr.D.L.Chidananda, Adv.
Mr.Samit Khosla, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balaram Das, AOR
For SCBA Mr. Devashish Bharuka, AOR
For State of Raj. Mr.Shiv Mangal Sharma, AAG
for Ms.Ruchi Kohli, AOR
For State of Mr.Tapesh Kr.Singh, Adv. Jharkhand Mr.Mohd.Waquas, Adv.
Mr.Shashank Singh, Adv.
For State of Mr.C.D.Singh, AAG Chhattisgarh Mr.A.P.Mayee, Adv.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Rathi, Adv.
Mr. A. Selvin Raja, Adv.
In I.A.No.7/15 Mr.Arvind P.Datar, Sr.Adv. In WP(C)13/15 Mr. Gautam Narayan, Adv.
For State of Mr.Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Adv. Manipur Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv.
For State of Mr.Sanjay Kr.Visen, AOR Haryana For State of MP JUDGMENTMr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR
For State of H.P. Mr.Suryanarayana Singh, AAG
Ms.Pragati Neekhra, Adv.
For Govt. of Mr.V.G.Pragasam, AOR Puducherry For State of U.P. Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, AAG
Mr.Utkarsh Jaiswal, Adv.
Mr. Som Raj Choudhary, Adv.
for Mr.Abhisht Kumar, AOR
for BCI Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Anjul Dwivedi, Adv.
For Andaman & Mr.K.V.Jagdishvaran, Adv. Nicobar Admn. Mrs.G.Indira, AOR
For State of Ms.Hemantika Wahi, AOR Gujarat
For State of Mr.Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Adv. Punjab Mr.Gaurav Yadava, Adv.
for Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR
For State of Mr.M.Yogesh Kanna, AOR Tamil Nadu Mr. Jayant Patel, Adv.
For State of Mr.Ritu Raj Biswas, Adv. Tripura Mr. Shreyas Jain, Adv.
for Mr.Gopal Singh, AOR
For State of Mr.Nishant R Kanteshwarkar, AOR Maharashtra
For State of Ms.Rachna Srivastava, AOR Uttarakhand
For State of Ms.Aruna Mathur, Adv. Sikkim Mr.Avneesh Arputham, Adv.
Ms.Anuradha Arputham, Adv.
Mr.Yusuf, Adv.
Mr. Shobhit Nanda, Adv. For State of JUDGMENTMrs.K.Enatoli Sema, Adv. Nagaland Mr.Edward Belho, Adv.
Mr.Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
For State of Mr. Shreyas Jain, Adv. Bihar for Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR
Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv.
for Mr. Varinder Kr. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Subo Sankar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Niranjan Sahu, Adv.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar pronounced the
Order of the Bench comprising His Lordship, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
J. Chelameswar, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur, Hon'ble Mr.
Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar
Goel.
For the reasons mentioned in the Reportable Order, which
is placed on the file, the Court while disposing of all the
matters collectively heard, directed as under:
9. During the course of hearing, we were also informed by
the learned Attorney General, that the Memorandum of Procedure
and introducing amendments therein, had always been prepared by
the Government of India in consultation with the President of
India and the Chief Justice of India. This practice, we were
informed, had been consistently adopted, in consonance with the
directions contained in paragraph 478 of the Second Judges
case. In order to allay any fear that may be entertained by
any of the stakeholders, it was submitted that the same
procedure would be adopted now, if the task was entrusted to the executive. We are in complete agreement with the suggestionof the learned Attorney General.
10. In view of the above, the Government of India may
finalize the existing Memorandum of Procedure by supplementing
it in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. The Chief
Justice of India will take a decision based on the unanimous
view of the collegium comprising the four seniormost puisne
Judges of the Supreme Court. They shall take the following
factors into consideration:
Eligibility criteria
The Memorandum of Procedure may indicate the eligibility
criteria, such as the minimum age, for the guidance of the
collegium (both at the level of the High Court and the Supreme
Court) for appointment of Judges, after inviting and taking
into consideration the views of the State Government and the
Government of India (as the case may be) from time to time.
Transparency in the appointment process
The eligibility criteria and the procedure as detailed in the
Memorandum of Procedure for the appointment of Judges ought to
be made available on the website of the Court concerned and on
the website of the Department of Justice of the Government of
India. The Memorandum of Procedure may provide for an
appropriate procedure for minuting the discussions including
recording the dissenting opinion of the Judges in the collegium
while making provision for the confidentiality of the minutes
consistent with the requirement of transparency in the system
of appointment of Judges.
Secretariat JUDGMENT
In the interest of better management of the system of
appointment of Judges, the Memorandum of Procedure may provide
for the establishment of a Secretariat for each High Court and
the Supreme Court and prescribe its functions, duties and
responsibilities.
Complaints
The Memorandum of Procedure may provide for an appropriate
mechanism and procedure for dealing with complaints against
anyone who is being considered for appointment as a Judge.
Miscellaneous
The Memorandum of Procedure may provide for any other matter
considered appropriate for ensuring transparency and
accountability including interaction with the recommendee(s) by
the collegium of the Supreme Court, without sacrificing the
confidentiality of the appointment process.
11. It is made clear that the guidelines mentioned above are
only broad suggestions for consideration and supplementing the
Memorandum of Procedure for the faithful implementation of the
principles laid down in the Second Judges case and the Third
Judges case.
(Renuka Sadana) (Parveen Kr. Chawla) Court Master AR-cum-PS