News Ticker

Supreme Court observed to test validity of NJA Commission, independently

New Delhi: It is decided by the honourable  Apex Judicial Authority of India- Supreme Court of India that for determining the Constitutionality of the National Judicial Appointments Commission- NJAC, the reference will not be made by it to the its Nine- Judges Bench or Eleven- Judges Bench. The said NJA Commission is to replace the SC-devised collegium system in relation to the appointment of judges to the Higher Judiciary.

The decision was taken by the honourable Supreme Court of India’s Bench comprising of Justice, J. S. Khehar, Justice, J. Chelameswar, Justice, M. B. Lokur, Justice, K. Joseph and Justice, A. K. Goel, where it is observed that the National Judicial Appointment Commission and Collegium System of appointment of Higher Judiciary are two different Systems and undertaking a comparison amongst themselves will be a ‘fallacy’. The said observation was made by the Bench, while Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Senior Advocate was arguing for making detail comparison between two for pointing the possibility of Executive organ’s interference in the matters of Independence of Judiciary. l

The Apex Court further observed that, there is only a simple question which is relating to testing of the validity of the NJA Commission and also as to whether the same is in violation to the ‘Basic structure’ of the our Law of Law i.e. Constitution of India.

The very significant remark made by the Court is that the testing of validity of NJA Commission should be independent of the Collegium system which was sent in motion since from 1998.

It was seen from the very first day of the scrutiny of NJA Commission, the Attorney General, Mr. Mukul Rohtgi has been trying to maintain that if the Court was relying on the 9- Judges bench Judgment of the year 1998 or the Seven- Judge bench judgment of 1993, which both stand as to formalizing the Collegium system, then the present Petitions to be referred to a Bench of 9- Judge or 11- Judge.

The question was put forwarded by Mr. Arvind Datar, Senior Advocate, against the Central Government’s intention where it had not provided any criteria to consider a person for eminent personality. As such it was pointed by him that the Government has intentionally left it out for imposing its nominees on the NJA Commission, which will result in interference by the Executive in the appointments of Judiciary.

by Faim Khalilkhan Pathan.