supreme court vacancies in tribunals: ‘we are in a democratic country, here is the rule of law’, supreme court furious at the center for choosing names voluntarily hai’, the Supreme Court furious at the Center for choosing the name arbitrarilyOn September 15, 2021 by admin
- The top court said that he conducted interviews from across the country
- The Supreme Court said that all its efforts are going to backfire.
- The selection committee recommended 41 people, but only 13 were selected: SC
The Supreme Court has expressed deep displeasure with the Central Government in the matter of filling up the vacant posts in tribunals across the country and said that the Central Government has played its own free will in choosing the names of the names recommended by the Selection Committee.
The names were recommended after a selection process led by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, but some names were selected by the Center from the selected list and the rest from the waiting list. Expressing anger, the Chief Justice said that we are in a democratic country, here there is rule of law and we work under the Constitution. You (central government) cannot say that we cannot accept names.
On this, Attorney General KK Venugopal, appearing for the Central Government, said that the right of the government not to accept the recommendation. Then Chief Justice NV Raman said, ‘It is the rule of law, you cannot talk of rejecting the name’.
Supreme Court is upset with the vacant posts in tribunals
In fact, the Supreme Court is very upset with the vacant posts in tribunals across the country. It said the manner in which the appointments have been made gives a clear indication of the ‘chosen people of their choice’. The court has directed the Center to make appointments within two weeks to tribunals where there is acute shortage of presiding officers as well as judicial and technical members.
The country’s Supreme Court also asked the Center to give reasons if the persons included in the recommended list are not appointed. A bench of Chief Justice (CJI) NV Ramana, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice L Nageswara Rao said the situation is “pathetic” due to vacancies in tribunals and litigants have not been left in limbo.
The Supreme Court asked- what kind of appointment is this?
The bench told Attorney General KK Venugopal, “The appointment letters issued clearly indicate that he has selected three persons of his choice from the selection list and others from the waiting list and the selection Other names on the list were ignored. In service law you cannot make appointment from waiting list by ignoring the selection list. What kind of selection and appointment is this?’
‘We traveled across the country. We put a lot of time into this. Your government requested us to conduct interviews at the earliest during COVID-19. We didn’t waste time.
NV Raman, Chief Justice, Supreme Court
Attorney General gave assurance
Venugopal assured the bench that the central government would make appointments to the tribunals in two weeks from the list of persons recommended by the search and selection committee. Senior advocate Arvind Datar said the search and selection committee for the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recommended 41 people, but only 13 were shortlisted and “we do not know” on what basis the selection was made. The bench said, “This is not a new thing. It’s the same story every time.
The Supreme Court was tired of petitions on reservation in promotion, know which orders were counted and said – that’s it, no more hearing
All our efforts going in vain: SC
The Chief Justice said that the Supreme Court judges followed an elaborate process for selecting names during COVID-19 and all efforts were in vain. He said, ‘We traveled across the country. We put a lot of time into this. Your government requested us to conduct interviews at the earliest during COVID-19. We didn’t waste time.’
The Chief Justice said that under the fresh appointment, the tenure of the members would be only one year. He said, ‘Which judge will do this work for one year?’ On the rejection of the names recommended by the selection committee, Venugopal said that the government has the right not to accept the recommendations. The CJI said, “We are a democratic country, where the rule of law is followed and we are working under the Constitution. You cannot say that I do not accept.’ If the government has to take the final decision, then what is the correctness of the process? The selection committee follows a detailed process for selecting the names.
Around 250 posts are vacant in various Principal Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals. The Supreme Court was hearing the petitions relating to vacancies in these tribunals and the matter relating to the new law governing quasi-judicial bodies.
(With inputs from Navbharat Times reporter Rajesh Chaudhary and news agency Bhasha)
- Pakistan serials expose with false evidence!
- Telecom companies will get relief in AGR payment
- ethiopian civil war: What Is Tigray War, Know All About Ethiopian Civil War With Itself
- Public representatives should follow high standards of discipline and decency Om Birla
- Congress is the true friendly party of farmers: Navjot Singh Sidhu..Navjot Singh Siddu accuses Sukhbir Singh Badal