The reasons for the rejection of recommendations for appointment of high court judges by the Supreme Court collegiums cannot be made public as it will be detrimental to the interests of people concerned and will stifle the appointment process, the Delhi high court has held.
The high court made the observation while dismissing an appeal challenging an order which had rejected a petition seeking a direction to the Supreme Court collegiums to provide detailed reasons while refusing to accept recommendations for the appointment of high court judges.
The appointment of a judge to the high court or Supreme court is an integrated, consultative and non-adversarial process which cannot be challenged in a court of law except on the ground of want of consultation with the named constitutional functionaries or lack of any condition of eligibility in case of an appointment or a transfer being made without the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India, it said.
“Further, publication of reasons for rejection will be detrimental to the interests and standing of people whose names have been recommended by the high courts, as the (SC) collegium deliberates and decides on the basis of information which is private to the individual being considered. Such information, if made public, will have the effect of stifling the appointment process,” a bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said.
The division bench said the single judge has correctly noted that this court cannot sit in appeal over the subjective satisfaction of the Supreme Court collegiums.
It said the law regarding appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and high courts is well settled and the apex court has drawn a distinction between eligibility and suitability of a person to be appointed as a judge of the high court.
Petitioner Rakesh Kumar Gupta also sought directions to the top court collegium to provide the "qualification" considered for appointment as a high court judge and publish monthly data related to pending and disposed of recommendations.
The petitioner, who claimed to be a victim of delay in disposal of his case pending in the Rohini district court here, said the "high" rejection rate of recommendations by the collegium of the Supreme Court was "extremely disturbing" and showed there was a communication gap between the apex court and high courts regarding the criteria for appointment.
The petitioner claimed the rejection rate in 2023 was about 35.29 percent against 4.38 percent in 2021.
The single judge had dismissed the petition with Rs 25,000 costs, saying it was a "complete waste of judicial time", the petitioner had no locus standi to raise the issue, and he did not give any reason as to how he was a victim.
The division bench dismissed the appeal and said if the petitioner believes that his matters have been delayed, he can file an application for early hearing on the judicial side.
