stopped attending meetings of the collegium

judges of higher courts

delay in appointment

National Judicial Appointment Commission

NEW DELHI: In a stunning revelation, the Supreme Court ’s fifth-most senior judge, Justice J Chelameswar , told The Times of India on Friday that he hasheaded by the Chief Justice of India as he finds its procedure and process “most opaque”, and the “majority gangs up” to shoot down genuine objections against undesirable candidates being chosen to beThis is most likely to have a serious and complicated fallout as the judiciary has been locked in a bitter face-off with the Centre over appointment of judges. It recently led to the CJI issuing a warning in open court that the SC might have to take judicial note of theof those already recommended.The collegium comprises CJI T S Thakur and Justices A R Dave, J S Khehar, Dipak Misra and Chelameswar. Breaking ranks with his colleagues in the collegium, which decides on the selection of judges to the SC and HCs, Justice Chelameswar spoke to TOI expressing his unhappiness over the entire process.“I have written a letter informing him that I will not be participating in the collegium’s meetings henceforth. The system of selection of judges is not at all transparent. No reason, no opinion is recorded. Just two people decide the names and come back to the meeting and ask for a yes or no. Can a judge of the Supreme Court or high court be selected in such a manner?” he asked.If a known corrupt person is being considered for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court and if one of the members of the collegium says he has evidence to back his opposition to his appointment, should such a person’s selection be decided on the basis of majority or rejected on the basis of the merit of the evidence given by the single member of the collegium?” “My experience shows that people gang up in the collegium and selections are done without anyone recording his view and the basis of that view. The outside world does not know what is happening inside the collegium. The inside world too does not know much. Two people sit and decide the names and then ask others to give their yes and no to the names,” he said.“Are we doing anything good for the country through this selection process? Should it not be on the basis of merit? What if a person who is opposing a name has the most valid grounds? Can such valid grounds be brushed aside by majority or through expression of yes or no” — were a few of the many questions Chelameswar asked. He had found no answer for his questions within the system, forcing him to inform the CJI that he would no be longer available for collegium meetings. He would, however, continue to go through the files relating to selection of judges and record his views on them.Justice Chelameswar was the sole judge to record his dissent against the collegium system and to support the(NJAC) as a better alternative while sitting on a five-judge constitution bench last year. Justices Khehar, Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Adarsh Goel had struck down NJAC although Joseph had agreed with Chelameswar that the collegium was an opaque system.So what had sparked the sudden outburst? Was it because certain undesired persons got selected by the collegium, TOI asked Chelameswar, to which he said: “I am not happy with the manner in which the collegium selects persons for appointment as judges. It’s been going on for 20 years, but that’s no solace for me to keep silent. I am not on individual names. I am raising an issue at a much higher level. The question is, are we doing something good for the country?”