Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
Sajib Nandi

SC collegium out, panel to pick judges gets President's nod

Recommended Posts

Sajib Nandi

Reported by Timesofindia.indiatimes.com on Jan 1, 2015

SC collegium out, panel to pick judges gets President's nod - The Times of India

 

The Supreme Court collegium system of appointing judges for the apex court and high courts gets a burial with President Pranab Mukherjee giving assent to the judicial appointments commission bill on Wednesday.

 

The Bill has already been ratified by at least 17 states and many more are in the process of doing it, said a senior law ministry official. It is mandatory for a constitutional amendment bill after it is passed by both the Houses of Parliament to be ratified by at least half of the states. This brings to an end a system which the apex court had, through a judgment in 1993, decided to appoint judges to put an end to the earlier practice of the government appointing judges.

 

The process of replacing the collegium with a judicial commission was first initiated during the first NDA government when it had brought a Bill in 2003 but this was never taken up by Parliament for consideration.

 

But after the Narendra Modi took over, Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was the law minister in the first NDA government, initiated the NJAC bill to replace the collegium and finally pursued political parties to evolve a consensus.

 

The government will shortly notify the new Constitutional amendment replacing the SC collegium with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). After the notification, the process of setting up of the NJAC will begin as provided under an enabling legislation which has also been passed by Parliament along with the Constitution amendment bill.

 

The enabling NJAC bill provides for a six-member commission headed by the chief justice of India and comprising two senior SC judges as its members besides two eminent persons and the law minister. The two eminent persons in the commission will be appointed by a panel comprising the CJI, the Prime Minister and the leader of the largest opposition party in Lok Sabha.

 

The NJAC also has provision for a veto where it provides that no name opposed by two or more of the six-member body can go through. The two eminent persons will have a tenure of three years and one of them would be from one of the following categories: Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, women or the minority community.

 

After the NJAC is set up, a name recommended for appointment as judge to the SC or HCs can be returned by the President for reconsideration. Though an initial recommendation to the President for appointment can be made by 5-1 majority, this would not suffice to re-recommend the same name.

 

If a name is returned for reconsideration, the committee can reiterate the name only if there is unanimity among the members after reconsideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

Written by Maneesh Chhibber , Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | Updated: April 13, 2015 8:15 pm

Over four months after the President granted assent to the two Bills, the NDA Government on Monday finally notified the Ninety-Ninth Constitutional (Amendment) Act and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, thus ending the over two-decade-old collegium system of appointing judges of Supreme Court and high courts.

The notification bringing the provisions of the new law into force was issued by Justice Secretary Kusumjit Sidhu. Sources said the government consulted Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi before issuing the notification.

 

End of collegium system; govt notifies NJAC law on judges’ appointment | The Indian Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

The Centre Tuesday told the Supreme Court that appointment of judges under the newly created National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) would be subject to public scrutiny unlike the opaque collegium system.

 

 

Defending the new system, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said: “If there are requirements, as per the Act and rules to be framed, the appointments will be subject to Right To Information (RTI) queries. The public will know why people are selected. In the collegium system that was not there”.

 

 

Read at: NJAC will be transparent, under RTI: Centre to SC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

New Delhi, May 6 (PTI) Putting up a strident case for the new system of judges appointment, Government today submitted before the Supreme Court that the collegium method has failed because it was an "opaque mechanism" which has "stifled democracy".

 

On a day, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi attacked the collegium system and demanded a revisit of the 1993 verdict by a larger bench, the court indicated that it can take a call on on the issue even before his arguments are over.Read more at;

 

fullstory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
koteswararaonerella

the new government has already abolished the age old planning commission and put some other brand name and also made all the chief ministers as members which was also existing in the past system.

if the collegium is disturbed then the rulers will appoint their own choicest people as SC judges which will be the end of independent judiciary system in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

R/sir, you are exactly right. A matriculated CM of any state or the politicians who may be leaders of country who do not fit as intellectual are going to select a justice for hon'ble SC, is it proper? I think such politicians should be neglected and i am hopeful that hon'ble SC will protect the Constitution of India.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
koteswararaonerella

this is the reason honourable CJI sri Dhat has already constituted an expert bench of large number of judges to examine this issue and now the government is murmering over this appiontment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

The government Monday told the Supreme Court that the collegium system is “dead and buried forever” and it cannot be revived even if the Constitution Bench quashes the new National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). The Parliament, it said, will have to frame another legislation to deal with the appointment of judges to the higher judiciary in case the constitutional amendment and the NJAC are held to be bad in law. - See more at:

 

Collegium dead & buried forever, can’t return: Govt to Supreme Court | The Indian Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hariprasadgv
the new government has already abolished the age old planning commission and put some other brand name and also made all the chief ministers as members which was also existing in the past system.

if the collegium is disturbed then the rulers will appoint their own choicest people as SC judges which will be the end of independent judiciary system in the country.

 

Please understand how NJAC functions:

 

NJAC only allows (PM, LOP & CJI) to nominate two eminent people (may be like T N Seshan OF CEC or Vinod Rai OF CAG Etc.,) to the panel of SC judges who would together appoint judges for High Court and Supreme Court.

 

You understand NJAC.. that the rulers appoint judges.....This is completely incorrect.

 

Many people in India never witness the justice delivery system from close but strongly believe that it is working perfect.....Advocates never reveal truth to the public.

 

In Indian democracy (Judiciary, Executive, Politicians & Media), Media is highly successful in reporting to the public of this country. Politicians are reasonably successful (from their law making role wise), it is negligible amont of law that was passed by the politicians but declared unconstitutional by the Judiciary. The executive is failure on three major counts (Corruption, Surrendering to politicians in their misdeeds/scams, Failure in delivering services to the public). The judiciary is utter flop and a miserable failure that it did not even leave a hope to the citizens of this country that it can maintain some standards in its justice delivery system. Please visit my

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
koteswararaonerella

if you think that the change of name or handing over the decision taking to the politicians than the judiciary. as in the present system will greatly change the deliberent of the justice to public. i am afraid ,you may not be correct.

secondly we cannot get seshan and roy's all the time and thse officers who wanted to be upright and refuse toe the line of political bosses will have to face the music of their life like what happened to the iAS officer of haryana and also srilakshmi-IAS oficer of AP who was in jail for more than one year for signing the mine allotment letter while the minister and CM escaped. in our country the officers are also heading to every chota leader and enjoying their life instead of fighting for rules and dying. somebody needs to assure them to act boldly then only the system may change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

R/hariprasadgv,

Hare Krishna.

 

As per your advise i visited your website About Us - prabhupadatownship but i am sorry to say that i did not find anything related to RTI Act or NJAC. What i read i reproduce below.

 

"Every Individual who is planning to buy property in Sri Prabhupada Layout / Township in Masjid banda, Kondapur Village, Hyderabad must go through the contents as given in the "Facts" page of this website in their own interest to take informed decision.

 

Every individual who has already purchased property in Sri Prabhupada Layout / Township in Masjidbanda, Kondapur Village, Hyderabad, would verify the facts as given in "Facts" page, and also with the online information as per the websites given in the page "Check civil case status online"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hariprasadgv
R/hariprasadgv,

Hare Krishna.

 

As per your advise i visited your website About Us - prabhupadatownship but i am sorry to say that i did not find anything related to RTI Act or NJAC. What i read i reproduce below.

 

"Every Individual who is planning to buy property in Sri Prabhupada Layout / Township in Masjid banda, Kondapur Village, Hyderabad must go through the contents as given in the "Facts" page of this website in their own interest to take informed decision.

 

Every individual who has already purchased property in Sri Prabhupada Layout / Township in Masjidbanda, Kondapur Village, Hyderabad, would verify the facts as given in "Facts" page, and also with the online information as per the websites given in the page "Check civil case status online"

 

Please read the contents of pages "Litigation sequence" and "Judgment analysis", in support of my comments on different pillars of democracy. If you are an advocate, you will understand and appreciate those two pages better. NJAC or Collegium system...what matters is which will improve the justice delivery system. Any analysis on justice delivery system is directly/indirectly related to NJAC purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Respected Hariprasad jee,

 

This portal is dedicated only to matters relevant to RTI Act and guiding citizens in seeking information from Public Authorities under RTI Act.

Most of the members that replied are lay persons and may not be Advocates or well versed with NJAC or Collegium system and Justice delivery system etc. practically and might have contributed replies out of general interest.

Please understand that high level of interaction between professional advocates with high exposure and knowledge is necessary and this forum, unfortunately is not capable of providing such inputs /discussions on intricacies of Justice delivery system. There are several dedicated law forums equipped with such competent active members who can contribute pages on such issues with authority and passing remarks of members may not be taken as seriously as the discussion is general in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hariprasadgv
Respected Hariprasad jee,

 

This portal is dedicated only to matters relevant to RTI Act and guiding citizens in seeking information from Public Authorities under RTI Act.

Most of the members that replied are lay persons and may not be Advocates or well versed with NJAC or Collegium system and Justice delivery system etc. practically and might have contributed replies out of general interest.

Please understand that high level of interaction between professional advocates with high exposure and knowledge is necessary and this forum, unfortunately is not capable of providing such inputs /discussions on intricacies of Justice delivery system. There are several dedicated law forums equipped with such competent active members who can contribute pages on such issues with authority and passing remarks of members may not be taken as seriously as the discussion is general in nature.

 

Your reply is noted. Some one started this thread "Collegium system opaque, faild- Attorney General" further other member/s comments continued. As natural response, I replied, I have no intention to bring new subject here. I regret the inconvenience caused to this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

But Hon'ble Supreme Court says; ""We cannot put judiciary in a freeze, asking the Centre to first argue on the validity of NJAC in order to enable the Court take a call whether a decision on the law will conflict with the 1993 decisions. The question of reference to a larger Bench is still open."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

So kind of you Hariprasad jee for understanding , and throwing some light on current burning issue and making a sincere attempt to bring relevant facts before a lay person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

This thread and the posts are a very good example as to why such threads should not be allowed on this forum.

 

Why waste time discussing something that we don't know enough about and that has absolutely no direct relevance to the principal object of the portal - RTI Act 2005.

 

Members, concentrate on the principal focus of this portal !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

The Centre on Wednesday sharply criticised the erstwhile collegium system of appointing judges saying that it did not follow the principle of meritocracy in which many "undeserving" persons became judges, some of whose names it gave in the Supreme Court.Read more at;

 

Modi government attacks collegium system in Supreme Court | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
koteswararaonerella

This is only POLITICAL DECISION and who can ASSURE that the new system will not recommend non desired people as SC/HC JUDGESIn any system there will be loop holes but govt.wantd to push through SC cannot hold it up for long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

NEW DELHI: A five judge constitution bench examining the constitutional validity of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), said, "The effect of transparency is no one will give honest adverse report as it will be put to public domain under the Right to Information (RTI). What is the point in transparency if you can't give honest opinion about the candidate?"

 

Justice JS Khehar heading the five constitution bench said, "If a lawyer is not selected and loses judgeship, and if his non-selection is to be subject matter of RTI, his profession will be ruined. Even if he becomes a judge and later on if the adverse comments are put in public domain it will lead to disastrous consequences for him."

 

Read at: Too Much Transparency in the New Judges Appointment System Will be Disastrous, Observes Supreme Court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]Subjecting Judicial Appointments Commission to RTI has many pitfalls: Supreme Court[/h]

New Delhi: Voicing their concern over the newly-created National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) which is subjected to public scrutiny under the RTI Act, the Supreme Court on Thursday observed that any member's honest comments will come to public domain which will have "disastrous" consequences.

Read at; Subjecting Judicial Appointments Commission to RTI has many pitfalls: Supreme Court | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

All threads on NJAC merged into one single thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

New Delhi, Jun 11 (PTI) The Supreme Court today raised questions over the lack of provisions in the law for removal of two eminent persons from the six-member National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) and sought to know whether there was any scope for judicial review of their selection.

 

"These eminent persons would be there for three years.

Read more at;

 

fullstory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]AG Concludes Arguments on NJAC Act[/h]

NEW DELHI: The Centre on Friday told the Supreme Court that the Collegium System had recommended names that were not worthy of acceptance and blamed the judiciary for promoting judges, who had reserved judgments in hundreds of cases after prolonged hearings.

“A tax payer may say that I pay your (judges) salaries, I have a right to know who is going to be a judge,” Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the Constitution Bench of Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, Justice J Chelameswar, Justice Madan B Lokur, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel.

Concluding his arguments, the AG promised that undeserving appointments would not pass through the NJAC while claiming that the Collegium chose a person, who hardly delivered judgments and later went on to become a Judge of the apex court.

“The shroud of mystery that the Collegium System had can only be lifted by the NJAC,” he contended, adding that under this, an under performing judge cannot be made the Chief Justice. Addressing the court’s apprehensions that disclosure of information under RTI would make the job of NJAC difficult, Rohatgi argued that it may not be necessary that all the information relating to the appointment of judges needed to be disclosed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read at: AG Concludes Arguments on NJAC Act - The New Indian Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Priya De
      By Priya De
      Find here the original Supreme court judgement on Aadhaar.
      (1)        The requirement under Aadhaar Act to give one's demographic and biometric information does not violate fundamental right of privacy.
      (2)        The provisions of Aadhaar Act requiring demographic and biometric information from a resident for Aadhaar Number pass three­fold test as laid down in Puttaswamy (supra) case, hence cannot be said to be unconstitutional.
      (3)        Collection of data, its storage and use does not violate fundamental Right of Privacy.
      (4)    Aadhaar Act does not create an architecture for pervasive surveillance.
      (5)        Aadhaar Act and Regulations provides protection and safety of the data received from individuals.
      (6)        Section 7 of the Aadhaar is constitutional. The provision does not deserve to be struck down on account of denial in some cases of right to claim on account of failure of authentication.
      (7)        The State while enlivening right to food, right to shelter etc. envisaged under Article 21 cannot encroach upon the right of privacy of beneficiaries nor former can be given precedence over the latter.
      (8)        Provisions of Section 29 is constitutional and does not deserves to be struck down.
      (9)        Section 33 cannot be said to be unconstitutional as it provides for the use of Aadhaar data base for police investigation nor it can be  said to violate protection granted under Article 20(3).
      (10)      Section 47 of the Aadhaar Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional on the ground that it does not allow an individual who finds that there is a violation of Aadhaar Act to initiate any criminal process.
      (11)      Section 57, to the extent, which permits use of Aadhaar by the State or any body corporate or person, in pursuant to any contract to this effect is unconstitutional and void. Thus, the last phrase in main provision of Section 57, i.e. “or any contract to this effect” is struck down.
      (12)      Section 59 has validated all actions taken by the Central Government under the notifications dated 28.01.2009    and 12.09.2009 and all actions shall be deemed to have been taken under the Aadhaar Act.
      (13)      Parental consent for providing biometric information under Regulation 3 & demographic information under Regulation 4 has to be read for enrolment of children between 5 to 18 years to uphold the constitutionality of Regulations 3 & 4 of Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016.
      (14)      Rule 9 as amended by PMLA (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 is not unconstitutional and does not violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 & 300A of the Constitution and Sections 3, 7 & 51 of the Aadhaar Act. Further Rule 9 as amended is not ultra vires to PMLA Act, 2002.
      (15)      Circular dated 23.03.2017 being unconstitutional is set aside.
      (16)      Aadhaar Act has been rightly passed as Money Bill.  The decision of Speaker certifying the Aadhaar Bill, 2016 as Money Bill is not immuned from Judicial Review.
      (17)      Section 139­AA does not breach fundamental Right of Privacy as per Privacy Judgment in Puttaswamy case.
      (18)      The Aadhaar Act does not violate the interim orders passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 494 of 2012 and other Writ Petitions.

    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      There can be no faith in government if our highest offices are excused from scrutiny - they should be setting the example of transparency.

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy