Suggestions for improvement and transparency in the Collegium System

Few suggestions for improvement and transparency in the Collegium System (Colsy).The letter may kindly be laid before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for suitable orders.

Introduction

• It is not correct to say that advocates working on writ jurisdiction under Article 226 or Art 32 are only most competent and worth recommending for a judgeship.  The Art. 32 empower the government to make law and distribute few powers under Art. 32 to the district judiciary to lesser workload. In most of the cases where the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred writ petition is the only remedy available. Otherwise, such cases might be dealt with by a civil court. The other point is writs under Art. 227 are not writs as such like writs under Art. 226 but as a practice nomenclature is given to such   petitions. Therefore, it is not correct to say that the advocates working on writ jurisdiction are preferable 'only' competent advocates.

• Advocates working on the civil side and dealing in civil cases may be given precedence over other advocates. This is because in such cases the competence of advocates is reflected. Such advocates may work on different branches of cases without any difficulty. This is because they develop the art of studying and art of approach to any subject in a case before them.

Recommending the names of advocates

From service quota

By Colsy

• So far elevation from the members of the district judiciary is concerned the concerning High courts have the record of the working of the judges. It is to be remembered that while recommending the names not only copies of complete record should be transmitted to the government, but it should also be remembered that names may also be recommended on merit cum seniority basis. There is nothing wrong in it. It should also not be necessary that person recommended should no English. Judgments written in the state recognized language cannot be termed as a demerit for an advocate or a judge of a district judiciary.There is always a translation branch in every high court and if required such judgments can be translated and may form the part of the record. There are provisions in procedural laws and rules framed by courts.

Recommendation of names

From advocates quota

by Colsy

• For recommendation of the names from Bar is concerned different yardstick may be adopted.

• Usually the high court judges including Chief Justice while hearing the cases makes the estimate  of quality of a judge, the capacity to understand law and facts, the way of presentation and delivery of arguments etc. After few days and hearing frequently the judges are able to estimate the ability and capacity of an advocate and may decide to recommend their names for the judgeship. After group discussion in Collegium, names are recommended.  However let there be open information to the Bar that such process is likely to start and Bar Associations/advocates may send names to be recommended. Such recommendations may also be considered. When names are made clear and sent to the government the list of names should be published. Persons who may have objections may send their objections to the government within a certain period. But subjections must not be unanimous but should be specific and with complete address, telephone/mobile number E-mail etc. On receiving complaints, the government may call such persons or make an inquiry through a proper agency. after consideration the government may send complete papers to the Union government.

The Union Government may through their recognized agencies like IB, CBI, and Vigilance Commission etc vigorously and thoroughly enquire whereabouts etc of all such recommended persons  and only then decide to recommend certain names to Supreme Court Collegium for consideration. The Supreme Court in its turn may make further enquiries as it likes and for that may decide the procedure to be adopted.  After its satisfaction, such names may be sent back to government and the government may after exercise of its discretion send such names to President of India.

Let the President of India may not be rubber stamp only to sign such recommendations but should exercise his discretion and adopt any procedure for enquiry and send for further expiation from the government.  His opinion should be the last word and there should be no say from anybody or even the Supreme Court.  His action in this matter should be his prerogative.

The general public should have right to know through the RTI to have information after competition of stage wise enquiry.

Hope these few points may be considered while considering the improvements in the Collegium system (Colsy ) for the appointment of judges.

Thanks,

(P.V.Namjoshi.)

108, Dashahara   Maidan,

Ujjain, M.P. 456010

pvnamjoshi@gmail.com