New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its displeasure over the delay of the Central Government in approving the names recommended by the collegium for the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court of India. The court said that the delay in approving the names recommended by the collegium effectively scuttles the process of appointment of judges. A bench of Justice SK Kaul and Justice AS Oka said that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court had set a time limit for completing the appointment process. The bench said that the time limit has to be followed.

Justice SK Kaul said that it appears that the government is unhappy with the fact that the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act has not been approved, but this cannot be a reason for not accepting the rule of law of the country. The Supreme Court in its 2015 judgment struck down the NJAC Act and the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014, restoring the existing collegium system of judges appointing judges to the Supreme Court. During the hearing on Monday, the apex court told Attorney General R Venkataramani that the ground reality is that the names recommended by the apex court collegium, including those reiterated, are not being cleared by the government.

The bench said how the system works? The bench also said that we have already expressed our anger. Justice Kaul said that sometimes the law is approved and sometimes it is not. He said that this cannot be a reason for not following the rule of law of the country. The apex court was hearing a petition alleging that there is willful disobedience of the deadline set by the Supreme Court in its order of April 20 last year for timely appointments.

The bench referred to the process followed for the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts. The bench said that once the collegium reiterates a name, the chapter ceases to exist. At the same time, the bench said that there cannot be a situation where recommendations are being made and the government sits on them, as it frustrates the system. The bench said that some names are pending with the government for one and a half years. The Supreme Court said that you are effectively thwarting the method of appointment.

Also, the bench said that due to the delay in the appointment process, some lawyers are withdrawing their consent given for promotion to the bench. The bench said that the government sometimes chooses only one name out of the names recommended by the collegium and this completely disturbs the seniority. The apex court said that the collegium recommends names keeping in view the aspect of seniority as well.

The Attorney General said that after the Supreme Court passed the order in the matter on November 11, he had some discussion with a secretary-level officer and said that he would come back to the court. Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who had earlier assisted the Supreme Court in the matter, referred to media reports relating to a statement by Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju on the issue of appointments. The bench said how many statements should we take cognizance of. During the hearing, when Vikas Singh again mentioned the news, Justice Kaul said that I ignore all the news of the press. The bench said that when a high level person says, let them say, we will do it ourselves.