NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday came down heavily on the government for the manner it filled up the vacancies in the Tribunals, "cherry-picking" names from the selections made by the committees of its judges.
It conveyed distress that the Centre was treating the recommendations of the selection committee comprising two Supreme Court judges and two secretaries with disdain and imposing its own choice.
What kind of appointments are these, Chief Justice of India N V Ramana asked Attorney General K K Venugopal, frowning at his submission that the government has the right not to accept the names recommended by the committee.
The CJI pointed out that the Centre had "cherrypicked" a few names from the select list prepared by the Search-cum-Selection Committees headed by the sitting Supreme Court judges; then, to make up the deficit, it had picked up certain names from the wait list, ignoring the names in the select list. He was himself on the selection committee for NCLT.
On the Attorney General’s assurance that the government will make the appointments within two weeks, the court adjourned the matter, saying "we are giving you two weeks’ time to come out with a comprehensive plan for the appointments."
Noting that the selection committee had recommended nine judicial members and 10 technical members, the CJI said: "The appointment letters indicate cherry picking of four names -- 1, 3, 5 and 7 -- from the selection list and others from the wait list. In service law, you can't go to the wait list ignoring the select committee."
"We are unhappy with the way things are going on and decisions are taken. We select people after conducting interviews and the government says we can't select them. We had 534 interviews for judicial members and over 400 for technical members," the CJI said.
Justice Nageswara Rao, another judge on the Bench, asked: "What is the sanctity of the process if the government will have the last word?
The Selection committee adopts an elaborate process to shortlist the names."
The CJI fumed that the Supreme Court judges undertook the exercise to shortlist the names during the Covid outbreak and the efforts are going in vain.
"We travelled across the country. We spent a lot of time. During Covid, your government requested us to conduct interviews as early as possible. We wasted so much time," Chief Justice Ramana said.
He pointed out that the latest appointments of the judicial members will have a tenure of one year effectively as the Centre kept the selections pending for nearly two years; the retired High Court judges by that time are 64 years of age, meaning they are left with only a one-year term before retirement at the age of 65 years.
"Which judge will join this job for one year," the CJI asked and told the Attorney General that the court can't accept the pick-and-choose process of the government. "We are a democratic country following rules of law," he affirmed.
The Special Bench, which also comprised Justice D Y Chandrachud, was hearing a batch of petitions highlighting the vacancies in various tribunals besides challenging the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021, laying down the tenures and other service conditions of the tribunal members.
Justice Chandrachud, who headed one of the selection committees, said: "In NCDRC also, recommendations were made, but the list was truncated, and appointments were made."
On September 6, the Court had given an ultimatum to the government to fill the vacancies or face contempt of court.
