Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju recently in a television interview said that the government has to show due diligence before signing the recommendations and they cannot sign off anything sent by the collegium.
The ongoing cold war between the judiciary and the executive took a new turn today as the bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and AS Oka without naming the union law minister Kiren Rijiju expressed reservation over his comments that unless the collegium system is replaced, the government will show due diligence in clearing the recommendations. The bench also cautioned the Attorney General that if the names are not cleared soon, it will be forced to pass judicial order, reports Bar & Bench.
Addressing AG R Venkataramani who was representing central government, Justice Kaul said, “Mr. Attorney General, I have ignored all press reports, but this has come from somebody high enough also with an interview... I am not saying anything else. If we have to, we will take a decision.”
Cautioning them of judicial order, the bench added, “Please resolve this and don't make us take a judicial decision in this regard.”
The apex court though didn’t clearly name Rijiju, it was evident that they were pointing out his interview given to a television channel during a summit. In the interview, the union law minister termed the collegium system alien and said that it is not backed by the country.
“Anything which is alien to the Constitution merely because of the decision taken by the courts or some judges, how do you expect that the decision will be backed by the country,” said Rijiju.
On being asked that why the government is sitting on the recommendation of the collegium, he said that the government will show due diligence. He also said that the judiciary cannot simply expect that the government will sign off whatever is sent.
The apex court today while pointing this out noted that the government can express its objection but it cannot just hold on the recommendations without citing any ground. “You cannot hold the names back without stating your reservations. I did not comment on the High Court names since 4 months had not elapsed, but these names are pending since 1.5 years. You are frustrating then method of appointment, we only issued notice to find out problem,” the bench said.
The SC was hearing the plea made by Advocates Association of Bengaluru that noted the government’s decision to hold on the recommendations of the collegium contravenes the Second Judges case that not only upheld the collegium system, rather also said that consultation means concurrence.
Referring to how the seniority of the judges are getting affected by the delays, the bench said, “Timelines have been laid out, have to be adhered to. So many recommendations pending. Good people must join the bench and timeline has to be adhered to unless there is an exception. Most of the names recommended have crossed 4 month limit. No information to us.”
“Once the names have been reiterated. It is crossing rubicons by keeping names like this. What happens is you completely disturb the seniority, Collegium considers all this,” the bench added.
According to the reports of Bar & Bench, the SC will hear the case further on December 8, by when the AG and Solicitor General will look into the matter.