NEW DELHI: The Centre has put on hold Supreme Court Collegium ’s recommendation for appointment of at least 10 advocates as judges of the country’s largest Allahabad High Court backing its initial objections that these lawyers, considered for elevation by the apex court, do not meet the minimum income qualification required to be recruited in the higher judiciary.

Though the CJI recently reminded the government to clear all the pending recommendations, the government has decided to hold back those where the candidates don't meet the eligibility criteria.

There are at least 13 recommendations from the Supreme Court (SC) Collegium for appointment as judges of the Allahabad High Court (HC) currently pending with the government, of which at least 10 do not meet the minimum income criteria. The government has also put on hold three other recommendations though these lawyers fulfil all eligibility criteria.

To become a High Court judge, an advocate must have an average net professional annual income of Rs 7 lakh in the preceding five years before his recommendation by the Collegium. However, it has been found that three recommended candidates have reported an average annual income of around Rs 4-4.5 lakh, while others have an average net professional annual income of less than Rs 7 lakh, thus making them ineligible, according to sources.

The set of recommendations, which includes a brother-in-law of an apex court judge and son of a former HC judge besides others, has created procedural problems for the Centre as the apex court Collegium, then comprising chief justice of India Ranjan Gogoi , Justices AK Sikri and SA Bobde, recommended elevation of these advocates (on February 12 this year) diluting the income criteria.

The government is of the opinion that the three-judge SC collegium decision is violative of certain conditions of appointments of HC judges as determined in the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) finalized by five top judges of the SC earlier. The MoP lays guidelines for appointment of judges to HC and SC.

On March 10, 2017, five-judge SC collegium — comprising of then CJI JS Khehar, Justices Dipak Misra, J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi and Madan B Lokur — had unanimously finalised the MoP and sent it to the Centre where it had clearly laid down against income criteria that a candidate recommended from Bar “should have a minimum average net professional income of Rs 7 lakh per annum or more during the preceding five years.” The current CJI, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, was a signatory to the MoP.

Since then, the CJI-headed Collegium has made several recommendations for appointment of judges of several High Courts and also rejected many candidates not meeting the minimum income criteria despite their names being recommended by the respective HC collegiums.

The controversial recommendations of the 10 advocates for Allahabd HC were withheld by the SC Collegium last year when the Centre pointed out their ineligibility. However, after six months, the Collegium in February this year again reiterated these names resulting in intense deliberations within the government on the insistence of the apex court.

The CJI Gogoi-led Collegium had justified reiteration of these recommendations observing that “the Collegium considers it appropriate to relax the income criterion to a reasonable extent in cases where such recommendees belong to categories of SC/ST/OBC or represent government in their capacity as standing/panel counsel before the courts.”

