Today the Central Government has rejected the recommendation of Collegium of Supreme Court of India in recommending the name of Justice K.M. Joseph, Chief Justice of Uttarakhand to the Highest Court of the country. The Centre has assigned several reasons for not accepting the recommendation of collegium. The main reason for rejection is that now adequate representation in the Supreme Court of India as far as Kerala is concerned. Since Justice KM Joseph belonged to Kerala State, now it is not appropriate to recommend his name for being appointed in the Supreme Court. Further, there are so many senior Judges and Chief Justices available for being appointed as a Judge of Apex Court comparing to the seniority of KM Joseph. The Central Government has also taken excerpts from the Second Judges and Third Judges case. It has also been stated that if no adequate representation for the State of Kerala, then the seniority will not be an issue, but when adequate representation, there cannot be any compromise in seniority. Though the Supreme Court of India strongly recommends the name of KM Joseph as “more deserving and suitable in all respects than other Chief Justices and senior puisne Judges of High Courts for being appointed as Judges of the Supreme Court of India”, it has been rejected by the Central Government.
The Central Government states that “Taking into consideration the points mentioned above, the proposed appointment of Shri Justice K M Joseph as a Judge of the Supreme Court at this stage does not appear to be appropriate. It would also not be fair and justified to other more senior, suitable and deserving Chief Justices and senior Puisne Judges of various High Courts For the reasons mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs, the government has been constrained to segregate the recommendations of the Supreme Court Collegium received vide your D 0 letter dated 19.01.2018. it may be mentioned here that such segregation of proposals has been done in many cases earlier, which include appointment of Judges to various High Courts and also to the Supreme Court in the interest of expeditious action on appointments and filling up of vacancies”
The delay of such decision is already an issue and now the rejection will add more fuel to the fire.
Read the Order KM Joseph Rejection
More Stories
The Apex Court on the Validity of Last Seen Theory and Forensic Evidence in Criminal Convictions
The Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction to apply the principle of Liberal Construction in interpreting the terms of the Contract- SC Ruled
The Court is not bound to follow statute or rules of evidence while deciding the custody of a Child and the only consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child- Supreme Court Reiterated