NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court collegium, the body that appoints judges, recently saw an unprecedented intervention by one of its members, who suggested there was “unwarranted intimacy between the executive and the judiciary” in the matter of appointing judges for the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh The collegium, in case of appointing high court judges, comprises of three seniormost judges including the Chief Justice of India . The body agreed with Justice Jasti Chelameswar, the seniormost judge after the CJI, and overruled arguments offered by Justice NV Ramana, a Supreme Court judge, and Andhra Pradesh chief minister Chandrababu Naidu objecting to the appointment of six advocates as high court judges.People familiar with the matter told ET that Justice Chelameswar had written to the then CJI, JS Khehar , on March 28 that “the proximity of the Hon’ble judge and the present chief minister of Andhra Pradesh is too well known.”That letter also stated: “The facts speak for themselves. The tenor of the opinions of the chief minister and the Hon’ble judge are too similar (almost identical) to be an accident. Coupled with the timing of the two letters, the only inference that can be drawn is that they are in live communication.”Justice Ramana told ET: “CJI had asked me to give my opinion on six advocates, which I have done. Beyond that, I can’t say anything”.He also said: “I have no idea about opinions given by CMs of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.” The Supreme Court judge said he did not wish to comment on any intervention by a collegium member.The office of the Andhra Pradesh chief minister did not respond to a questionnaire sent by ET. Several calls made by ET to the office of Satish Chandra, special chief secretary to the AP chief minister, did not elicit a response.The matter refers to the proposal of appointing six advocates to the high court in Hyderabad for Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, for which opinions of both chief ministers were sought.People familiar with the issue told ET Justice Chelameswar’s letter talked of “the most brazen example of the unwarranted intimacy between the judiciary and the executive.”The document, these people said, also questioned the timing of the submissions by Justice Ramana and Naidu. Naidu wrote to the law minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, on March 21 objecting to the appointment of the six advocates. Justice Ramana noted his concerns to ex-CJI Khehar on March 24.The names of the six advocates were proposed by Justice Dilip B Bhosale, the acting Chief Justice of the high court at Hyderabad, on April 30, 2016, and the chief ministers were requested to give their opinions. Telangana CM K Chandrasekhar Rao submitted his view in a month, Andhra CM Naidu forwarded his opinion after 11 months.“If the state government does not give its opinion within six weeks from the date the proposals are received from the high court, the said proposal is deemed to have been accepted,” Chelameswar is said to have pointed out in his intervention. Justice Chelameswar’s intervention, those familiar with the issue said, also detailed points of similarity between the judge’s and the CM’s letters.The collegium member is believed to have noted the following paragraphs from the two letters.The March 21 letter of the Andhra CM said: “Five out of six recommendees are either relatives of judges, their juniors or their near ones…” The March 24 letter of Justice Ramana said: “Five out of the six recommendees are either the scions of the judges or their juniors or their near ones…”.Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s intervention is said to have noted other such examples.Justice Chelameswar is also said to have noted in his intervention that “... unverified and unsubstantiated accusations and decision-making on the basis of such allegations expose(s) the collegium system to criticism”. And also that, “the IB (Intelligence Bureau) report does not support the opinion”. He recommended that “all the names may be cleared.”The Supreme Court collegium agreed with Justice Chelameswar and forwarded the names of the six candidates to the government. The government decision is awaited.Naidu wrote to law minister onobjecting to appointment of 6 advocatesJustice Ramana noted his concerns to ex-CJI onNames of 6 advocates proposed by Justice Dilip B Bhosale, the acting Chief Justice of the high court at Hyderabad, on; chief ministers were requested to give their opinionsTelangana CM K Chandrasekhar Rao submitted his view in a month, Andhra CM Naidu forwarded his opinion after 11 monthsletter of Andhra CM: “Five out of six recommendees are either relatives of judges, their juniors or their near ones…”letter of Justice Ramana: “Five out of the six recommendees are either the scions of the judges or their juniors or their near ones…” Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s intervention is said to have noted other such examples