Source – thehindu.com
The government is learnt to have cleared the Supreme Court Collegium’s recommendation to appoint Justice A.A. Kureshi as the Chief Justice of Tripura High Court.
The Collegium had initially in May recommended Justice Kureshi for appointment as the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. But the government, in back-to-back letters on August 23 and 27, had raised objections to the proposal.
Following this, the Collegium had recommended Justice Kureshi’s appointment to the Tripura High Court in September.
A source said the recommendation had been cleared at the prime ministerial level and was expected to be notified soon.
On Thursday, a petition filed by the Gujarat High Court Advocates Association came up for hearing before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. The case was adjourned to November 13. The Chief Justice said the case would come up next before a Bench led by Justice S.A. Bobde, Chief Justice of India-designate.
On September 23, while hearing the case filed by the advocates’ association, the Supreme Court had passed an order issuing a general reprimand against ‘interference’ by third parties in matters of judicial appointments and transfers. The order passed by a Bench led by Chief Justice Gogoi said such intrusions would not “augur well” for the institution.
Chief Justice Gogoi had recorded in the order that matters of judicial appointments, postings and transfers go to the “root of the administration of justice”.
Justice Bobde, in an interview to The Hindu, had dismissed questions about the perceived delays in governmental clearance of Collegium recommendations saying “machineries operate at their own speed”. The Collegium has also stopped giving reasons for its recommendations in its recent resolutions published on the Supreme Court website.
Recently, Justice V.K. Tahilramani chose to resign as the Madras High Court Chief Justice when the Collegium proposed her transfer to the Meghalaya High Court. The Supreme Court was finally compelled to issue a statement that Justice Tahilramani’s proposed transfer was in the best interests of administration of justice. It had offered to reveal the reasons for the proposal if necessary.