Supreme Court says no urgency to reconsider verdict in NJAC case

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court declined to urgently review a plea concerning the judgement which struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) leading to the revival of the collegium system.

When the matter was mentioned, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra along with Justices Amitava Roy and AM Khanwilkar observed that there was no urgency to review the 2015 verdict pronounced by a five-judge Constitution Bench.

The matter takes on more importance since the vacancies in the top court rose to six with Justice PC Pant's retirement on Tuesday. The newly sworn in Chief Justice will have to fill up as many as 10 vacancies before he demits office in October 2018.

The newly realigned collegium — which appoints judges in the higher judiciary — will have to deal with 407 vacancies across 24 high courts in the country. With more than three crore cases pending in the judiciary, the situation is dire.

In 2013, while speaking at an event, former CJI India Altamas Kabir had said that there were only 15 judges for every one million population in India, making it one of the lowest judge-population ratios in the world.

Four years later, not much has changed.

The discord between the current NDA -government and the judiciary under former Chief Justice TS Thakur came to a head when the SC scrapped the NJAC on October 17, 2015.

However, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad disagreed and repeatedly stated that the Modi-led government has made the highest number of judicial appointments in almost a quarter of a century.

From Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), stalled appointments and non-movement of files, was just the tip of the iceberg in the long list of issues that plagued the judiciary. Access to justice within reasonable time – a basic right accorded to us in the constitution thus became an unlikely victim in this bitter public battle of the parents.

The relationship however, has taken a significant turn with the elevation of Chief Justice of India JS Khehar.

The SC collegium made relative peace with the MoP – a long standing thorn and once a bone of contention. Before the logjam, CJI Thakur had refused to agree to the controversial national security clause the government wanted to insert in the MoP. This would allow the government to hold the power to reject any name for appointment as a judge of the high court for reasons of "national security."

While it has not been smooth sailing, the collegium has at least conceded on accepting integrity reports on judges prepared by the Intelligence Bureau (IB) before making appointments.

While, the working and the functions between the Centre and the judiciary seem to have gained smooth ground, sweeping certain issues under the carpet leave a bitter after taste.

It remains to be seen whether CJI Misra inherits the long standing dispute between the government and the judiciary, or perhaps finds a way out.

NJAC Act, 2014

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act 2014 would have accorded a major role to the executive in appointing judges to the higher judiciary.

The apex court had on October 16, 2015 struck down the ambitious NJAC Act, 2014 to replace the 22-year-old collegium system of judges appointing judges.

While four out of the five judges of the constitution bench had held as unconstitutional and void both the NJAC Act and the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act 2014, Justice J Chelameswar had upheld the validity of the constitution amendment law.