Plea Before Supreme Court to Scrap Collegium System, Seeks Revival of NJAC for Fair Judicial Appointments [READ PETITION]

The National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) has filed the writ petition before the supreme court to scrap the collegium system, seeking revival of NJAC for fair judicial appointments.

“The recent incident of burning of cash at the residence of a sitting judge of a High Court, has once again brought to the public domain, the undeniable need to revisit the judgment of this Court in the Judges-2 case and the NJAC case, inasmuch as the collegium system of appointment and transfer of judges is no longer a mere synonym for nepotism and favouritism, but even of improbity,” the Petition read.

The writ petition was filed for a declaration that the collegium system of appointment of judges has resulted in the denial of equal opportunity for the Petitioners and thousands of lawyers who are eligible, meritorious and who deserve to be considered for appointment. A mechanism in substitution of the Collegium is the need of the hour. 

The Petitioners have made repeated representations to the Government to bring about the requisite mechanism. However, nothing concrete has taken shape. Moreover, rather than the Government, it is for the Hon’ble Supreme Court itself to correct the error caused in creating the Collegium and in thwarting the National Judicial Appointments Commission, which is the result of a national consensus, an outcome of the efforts of several decades.

The petition states a Court is free to err within its jurisdiction is a fundamental principle of law. 

However, the Supreme Court in holding the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act and the NJAC Act as unconstitutional, has not committed an error within its jurisdiction. It is an error which the Court is not permitted to make. 

TheActs are in the realm of legislative policy as to how the judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court are to be selected and appointed, which was not a justiciable issue at all. The Courts have no jurisdiction at all. The Courts province is to adjudicate disputes where at least one of the parties complains of violation of their rights, and when it comes to Article 32/226, the violation of fundamental rights. Hence the instant writ petition under Article 32 of the constitution.

Read More: Gold Smuggling Bid Busted at IGI Airport: Yellow Paste Hidden in Shoes Seize