TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 2219
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fy the administrative authority of the Chief Justice of India (for short, the 'Chief Justice') as the Master of Roster and for laying down the procedure and principles to be followed in preparing the Roster for allocation of cases. 3. It may be mentioned at the outset that the petition acknowledges and accepts the legal principles that the Chief Justice is the "Master of Roster" and has the authority to allocate the cases to different Benches/Judges of the Supreme Court. It is also conceded that adherence to this principle, namely, the Chief Justice is the Master of Roster, is essentially to maintain judicial discipline and decorum. It is also stated that the Chief Justice is first among equals, meaning thereby all Judges of the Supreme Court are equal with same judicial power, with Chief Justice as the senior most Judge. At the same time, it is contended that this power is not to be used to assert any superior authority by the Chief Justice and the power is to be exercised in a manner that is fair, just and transparent. As the Master of Roster, it is also conceded that it is the Chief Justice who has to decide as to which Bench will hear a particular case. The apprehens....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....actice and Procedure and Office Procedure or picking and choosing Benches for the purpose of listing contrary thereto, with the above modification of replacing 'Chief Justice of India' with the collegium of 5 senior most judges of this Hon'ble Court. (d) That this Hon'ble Court may Clarify that when matters are mentioned for urgent hearing/listing, only a date/time of hearing would be fixed but the Bench to hear the matter would be determined in accordance with the Rules. (e) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant such other and further relief as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and as may be required in the interests of justice. 4. Mr. Dushyant Dave, learned senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that in certain cases, instances whereof are given in the writ petition, the manner in which matters are allocated to certain Benches reflect that either there was no strict adherence to the Rules or the transparency was lacking. He, however, at the outset, made it clear that the Petitioner does not seek to question the validity of any judicial orders and/or judgments which have been rendered in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... all aspects of a question at one time and moreover sometimes, the information on which we base our judgments may be incorrect or inadequate and our judgment may also sometimes be imperceptibly influenced by extraneous or irrelevant considerations. It may also be noticed that it is not difficult to find reasons to justify what our bias or predilection or inclination impels us to do. It is for this reason that we think it is unwise to entrust power in any significant or sensitive area to a single individual, howsoever high or important may be the office which he is occupying. There must be checks and controls in the exercise of every power, particularly when it is a power to make important and crucial appointments and it must be exercisable by plurality of hands rather than be vested in a single individual... This principle has been subsequently followed by this Court in the Second and Third Judges' case. The interpretation so canvassed by this Court must equally apply in respect of the power, if any, exclusively claimed by the Chief Justice as the Master of the Roster. It is well settled that in a statute a particular expression must receive the same and consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udiciary, power of listing the cases has to be exercised in a fair and transparent manner so as to instill confidence in the public at large that the matter shall be decided by the Court (or for that matter, by a particular Bench) strictly on legal principles to ensure that Rule of Law, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution, prevails. In this context, it was argued that the power to allocate the cases should not be with one individual and this could be taken care of by applying the principle laid down in the Second Judges' case wherein, while laying down the foundation of the Collegium system for the appointment of Judges, it was held: 427. It is, therefore, realistic that there has to be room for discretionary authority within the operation of the Rule of law, even though it has to be reduced to the minimum extent necessary for proper governance; and within the area of discretionary authority, the existence of proper guidelines or norms of general application excludes any arbitrary exercise of discretionary authority. In such a situation, the exercise of discretionary authority in its application to individuals, according to proper guidelines or n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was for this reason that the word 'consultation' instead of 'concurrence' was used, but that was done merely to indicate that absolute discretion was not given to anyone, not even to the Chief Justice of India as an individual, much less to the executive, which earlier had absolute discretion under the Government of India Acts. xx xx xx 466. It has to be borne in mind that the principle of non-arbitrariness which is an essential attribute of the Rule of law is all pervasive throughout the Constitution; and an adjunct of this principle is the absence of absolute power in one individual in any sphere of constitutional activity. The possibility of intrusion of arbitrariness has to be kept in view, and eschewed, in constitutional interpretation and, therefore, the meaning of the opinion of the Chief Justice of India, in the context of primacy, must be ascertained. A homogenous mixture, which accords with the constitutional purpose and its ethos, indicates that it is the opinion of the judiciary 'symbolised by the view of the Chief Justice of India' which is given greater significance or primacy in the matter of appointments. In other words, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., as indicated, is another inbuilt check against the likelihood of arbitrariness or bias, even subconsciously, of any individual. The judicial element being predominant in the case of appointments, and decisive in transfers, as indicated, the need for further judicial review, as in other executive actions, is eliminated. The reduction of the area of discretion to the minimum, the element of plurality of judges in formation of the opinion of the Chief Justice of India, effective consultation in writing, and prevailing norms to regulate the area of discretion are sufficient checks against arbitrariness. 7. Mr. Dave also referred to the following observations of Justice J.S. Verma (as His Lordship then was) in that very judgment: 478. This opinion has to be formed in a pragmatic manner and past practice based on convention is a safe guide. In matters relating to appointments in the Supreme Court, the opinion given by the Chief Justice of India in the consultative process has to be formed taking into account the views of the two senior most Judges of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of India is also expected to ascertain the views of the senior-most Judge of the Supreme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court of Australia (which is the apex court of that country), Supreme Court of Canada, German Federal Court and even European Court of Human Rights and European Court of Justice. 10. Mr. Venugopal, learned Attorney General, in reply to the aforesaid arguments of the Petitioner, submitted that the Petitioner has virtually accepted the legal position to the effect that the Chief Justice is the 'Master of Roster' and in that capacity he also has the authority to allocate the cases to different Benches/Judges of the Supreme Court. Therefore, the grievance, essentially, of the Petitioner was about the manner in which such a power is being exercised. However, at the same time, the Petitioner had also made it clear that he was not questioning particular decisions rendered by particular Benches which were assigned some of the important matters, pointed out the learned Attorney General. He submitted that the substance of the argument of the learned senior Counsel for the Petitioner was that in order to ensure that the cases are assigned in a fair and transparent manner, the term 'Chief Justice' should be interpreted to mean 'Collegium' of five senior most judges i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the proper and efficient functioning of the Court. Notwithstanding this concession, it would be imperative to explain this legal position with little elaborations, also by referring to some of the judgments of this Court which spell out the scope and ambit of such a power. 13. The Petitioner has himself, in the petition, referred to a three-Judge Bench in State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand and Ors. (1998) 1 SCC 1 held that the Chief Justice of the High Court is the Maser of Roster and he alone has the prerogative to constitute the Benches of the Court and allocate cases to the Benches so constituted. The Court stated thus: 59. From the preceding discussion the following broad conclusions emerge. This, of course, is not to be treated as a summary of our judgment and the conclusions should be read with the text of the judgment: (1) That the administrative control of the High Court vests in the Chief Justice alone. On the judicial side, however, he is only the first amongst the equals. (2) That the Chief Justice is the master of the roster. He alone has the prerogative to constitute benches of the court and allocate cases to the benches so constituted. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ain that the said principle is applicable to the Supreme Court. We are disposed to think so. Unless such a position is clearly stated, there will be utter confusion. Be it noted, this has been also the convention of this Court, and the convention has been so because of the law. We have to make it clear without any kind of hesitation that the convention is followed because of the principles of law and because of judicial discipline and decorum. Once the Chief Justice is stated to be the Master of the Roster, he alone has the prerogative to constitute Benches. Needless to say, neither a two-Judge Bench nor a three-Judge Bench can allocate the matter to themselves or direct the composition for constitution of a Bench. To elaborate, there cannot be any direction to the Chief Justice of India as to who shall be sitting on the Bench or who shall take up the matter as that touches the composition of the Bench. We reiterate such an order cannot be passed. It is not countenanced in law and not permissible. 8. An institution has to function within certain parameters and that is why there are precedents, Rules and conventions. As far as the composition of Benches is concerned, we acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owers the Supreme Court to make Rules for regulating generally the practice and procedure of the Court, including the matters specifically mentioned in Clause (I) of Article 145 of the Constitution, which Rules are to be made with the approval of the President of India. The Court also referred to Order VI of the Rules. This order deals with the constitution of division courts and powers of a Single Judge. Rule 1 thereof provides that it is the Chief Justice who is to nominate the Judges who would constitute a Bench to hear a case, appeal or matter. Where a reference is made to a larger Bench, the Bench making the reference is required to refer the matter to the Chief Justice who will constitute the Bench. Rule 1, thus, empowers the Chief Justice to constitute a Division Bench as well as a larger Bench. In case where the reference is made by a Bench to a larger Bench, again, which Judges will constitute the said Bench is left to the discretion of the Chief Justice. It nowhere says that the members of the Bench making reference are to be the members of the larger Bench as well. Likewise, Order XXXVIII of the Rules deals with applications for enforcement of fundamental rights Under Ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....harbour a misconception that certain categories of cases or certain courts must consist only of the senior-most in terms of appointment. Every Judge appointed to this Court Under Article 124 of the Constitution is invested with the equal duty of adjudicating cases which come to the Court and are assigned by the Chief Justice. Seniority in terms of appointment has no bearing on which cases a Judge should hear. It is a settled position that a judgment delivered by a Judge speaks for the court (except in the case of a concurring or dissenting opinion). The Constitution makes a stipulation in Article 124(3) for the appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court from the High Courts, from the Bar and from amongst distinguished jurists. Appointment to the Supreme Court is conditioned upon the fulfilment of the qualifications prescribed for the holding of that office Under Article 124(3). Once appointed, every Judge of the Court is entitled to and in fact, duty bound, to hear such cases as are assigned by the Chief Justice. Judges drawn from the High Courts are appointed to this Court after long years of service. Members of the Bar who are elevated to this Court similarly are possessed of wid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....signed priorities to certain categories of cases such as those involving senior citizens, convicts who are in jail and women litigants. These priorities are considered while preparing the roster. Impending retirements have to be borne in mind since the assignment given to a judge who is due to demit office would have to be entrusted to another Bench when the vacancy arises. These are some of the considerations which are borne in mind. The Chief Justice is guided by the need to ensure the orderly functioning of the court and the expeditious disposal of cases. The publication of the roster on the websites of the High Courts provides notice to litigants and lawyers about the distribution of judicial work under the authority of the Chief Justice. This Court was constituted in 1950. In the preparation of the roster and in the distribution of judicial work, some of the conventions which are adopted in the High Courts are also relevant, subject to modifications having regard to institutional requirements. 20. The aforesaid judgment of the three Judges' Bench is a binding precedent. This judgment, in no uncertain terms, holds that the 'Chief Justice' in his individual capaci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ement, speedy disposal etc.) but also include reforms on the administrative side of the legal system as well. Procedural reforms and implementation thereof is an integral part of the judicial reform. The ultimate purpose is to dispense justice, which is the highest and noblest virtue. Again, in this role, the 'Chief Justice' gets the authority and responsibility for the administration of the Court, which gives him the ultimate authority for determining the distribution of judicial work load. In Indian context, this power was given statutory recognition by Section 214(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935 which reads as under: (2) Rules made under this Section may fix the minimum number of judges who are to sit for any purpose, so however that no case shall be decided by less than three judges: Provided that, if the Federal Legislature makes such provision as is mentioned in this chapter for enlarging the appellate jurisdiction of the court, the Rules shall provide for the constitution of a special division of the court for the purpose of deciding all cases which would have been within the jurisdiction of the court even if its jurisdiction had not been so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the task of constitution of Benches and allocation of specific cases to those Benches, can more smoothly be performed by the Chief Justice and discharge of such a function by the Collegium would be unworkable and also lead to many practical difficulties. 27. As already taken note of above, the basis of this argument is the judgment of this Court in Second Judges' case which laid the foundation of the Collegium system for the appointment of Judges. The relevant passages from the said judgment, which are relied upon by the learned senior Counsel for the Petitioner, have already been extracted above. The Court accepted that there has to be room for discretionary authority within the operation of Rule of law. At the same time, it was emphasised that such a discretion should be reduced to minimum extent necessary for proper governance, which can be achieved with the existence of proper guidelines or norms of general application. In this hue, the Court deemed it proper that conferment of the discretionary authority should not be with one individual but to a body of men and, thus, evolved the system of Collegium whereby the Chief Justice will have benefit of full interaction a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that function such as 'framing the Roster' and 'listing of important and sensitive matters' are extremely crucial and cannot be left to the sole discretion of the Chief Justice is also met in Asok Pande, in the following manner: 15. Underlying the submission that the constitution of Benches and the allocation of cases by the Chief Justice must be regulated by a procedure cast in iron is the apprehension that absent such a procedure the power will be exercised arbitrarily. In his capacity as a Judge, the Chief Justice is primus inter pares: the first among equals. In the discharge of his other functions, the Chief Justice of India occupies a position which is sui generis. Article 124(1) postulates that the Supreme Court of India shall consist of a Chief Justice of India and other Judges. Article 146 reaffirms the position of the Chief Justice of India as the head of the institution. From an institutional perspective the Chief Justice is placed at the helm of the Supreme Court. In the allocation of cases and the constitution of benches the Chief Justice has an exclusive prerogative. As a repository of constitutional t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....behind the constitutional structure founded on the cherished values of democracy. 31. The Constitution makers, thus, reposed great trust in the judiciary by assigning it the powers of judicial review of not only the administrative acts of the Government/Executive but even the legislative acts of the Legislature. In the process, judiciary discharges one of the most important functions, namely, the administration of justice. It does so by upholding the Rule of law and, in the process, protecting the Constitution and the democracy. Our Constitution guarantees free speech, fair trials, personal freedom, personal privacy, equal treatment under the law, human dignity and liberal democratic values. This bundle of non-negotiable rights and freedoms has to be protected by the judiciary. For this reason, independence of judiciary is treated as one of the basic features of the Constitution. Here, we may point out four major aspects of judicial status or performance, which are: independence; impartiality; fairness; and competence. 32. Alexander M. Bickel had emphasised way back in 1962^4 that the judiciary is the least dangerous branch as it has neither the purse nor the sword, by reprod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erception does not receive a setback consciously or unconsciously. Authenticity of the judicial process rests on public confidence and public confidence rests on legitimacy of judicial process. Sources of legitimacy are in the impersonal application by the Judge of recognised objective principles which owe their existence to a system as distinguished from subjective moods, predilections, emotions and prejudices. 34. We may also quote the following passage from S.P. Gupta (per Pathak, J.): While the administration of justice draws its legal sanction from the Constitution, its credibility rests in the faith of the people. Indispensable to that faith is the independence of the judiciary. An Independent and impartial judiciary supplies the reason for the judicial institution, it also gives character and content to the constitutional milieu. 35. In the same decision, J.S. Verma, J. echoed the aforesaid sentiments with the following message: The role of the Judiciary under the Constitution is a pious trust reposed by the people. The Constitution and the democratic-polity thereunder shall not survive, the day Judiciary fails to justify the said trust. If the Judici....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only record that the judicial systems in different countries have different styles of functioning and the practices have been developed in various countries keeping in view the structure of the Courts^6. Even the procedural characteristics of litigation are different. Therefore, system prevalent and developed in one jurisdiction cannot be mechanically adopted by judicial system in other countries. At the same time, there is no harm in adopting those healthy practices which have been developed in foreign jurisdictions and which can be easily adopted because of their universal application. After all, no system is fool-proof. There is always a scope for improvement. Reforms in the administration of justice, whether on judicial side or administratively, is a continuing process. We all learn from experiences and strive to do better. 40. Of course, it goes without saying that the matters need to be listed and assigned to the Benches in accordance with the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and Handbook of Practice and Procedure. 41. Having regard to the aforesaid principles laid down in the binding precedents, it is difficult to accept the prayer of the Petitioner that the expression 'C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt and former Law Minister has filed this writ petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution praying for following reliefs: a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of declaration or a writ in the nature of declaration or any other appropriate writ, order or direction holding and declaring that listing of matters must strictly adhere to the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and Handbook on Practice and Procedure and Office Procedure, subject to the following clarification: i) The words 'Chief Justice of India' must be deemed to mean a collegium of 5 senior judges of this Hon'ble Court. b) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of declaration or a writ in the nature of declaration or any other appropriate writ, order or direction holding and declaring that the consultation by the Registry, Officials for listing purposes, if any with the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India must include consultation with such number of senior-most judges as this Hon'ble Court may fix in the interest of justice,. c) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ in the nature of pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent and in keeping with the high standards of integrity desired from the office of a Chief Justice of India. 47. The Petitioner refers to a Three Judge Bench judgment in State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand and Ors., (1998) 1 SCC 1, wherein it was held that the Chief Justice of the High Court is the master of the roster and he alone has the prerogative to constitute the benches of the court and allocate cases to the benches so constituted. It is further pleaded in the writ petition that the writ petition raises questions relating to the functioning of the Registry of the Supreme Court and the powers exercised by the Chief Justice of India, inter-alia, in "listing matters" so as to list matters of general public importance and/or of political sensitivity before only certain Benches contrary to the Supreme Court Rules, Handbook of procedure and conventions. Petitioner, however, specifically states in Paragraph 14 of the writ petition that "present petition does not seek to question any judicial orders and/or judgments". The Petitioner has made reference to certain cases, which according to Petitioner reflects and establishes gross abuse of powers. The Petitioner in context of above....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of this Court. By participation of other judges, there is likelihood that conflict of interest. Multiplicity of judges forming the roster will lead to chaos, hampering the smooth functioning of the Court. Learned Attorney General has referred to various judgments of this Court for the proposition that Chief Justice has been held to be master of roster and it is sole prerogative of Chief Justice to constitute benches and allocate cases to different benches for smooth functioning of the Court. Shri Dushyant Dave replying the submission of learned Attorney General submits that the objective of writ petition is to evolve a transparent and non-arbitrary system for allocation of cases and formation of benches to allay any criticism of functioning of this Court. The object of Writ Petition is not to make allegations against anyone or to question any judgment of this Court; rather the entire endeavour is to improve the judicial system to strengthen the independence of judiciary. 50. We have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the records. 51. Before we consider the rival submissions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties, it is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s which would have been within the jurisdiction of the court even if its jurisdiction had not been so enlarged. (3) Subject to the provisions of any Rules of court, the Chief Justice of India shall determine what judges are to constitute any division of the court and what judges are to sit for any purpose. (4) No judgment shall be delivered by the Federal Court save in open court and with the concurrence of a majority of the judges present at the hearing of the case, but nothing in this Sub-section shall be deemed to prevent a judge who does not concur from delivering a dissenting judgment. (5) All proceedings in the Federal Court shall be in the English language. 54. Sub-section (3) of Section 214 specifically provided; that subject to the provisions of any Rules of court, the Chief Justice of India shall determine what judges are to constitute any division of the court and what judges are to sit for any purpose. The Chief Justice of India thus was exercising jurisdiction of constituting any division of the Court and nominating judges for sitting for different purposes. 55. Part V Chapter IV of the Constitution of India deals with the Union Judicia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... administrative control of the High Court vests in the Chief Justice of the High Court alone and that it is his prerogative to distribute business of the High Court both judicial and administrative. He alone, has the right and power to decide how the Benches of the High Court are to be constituted: which Judge is to sit alone and which cases he can and is required to hear as also as to which Judges shall constitute a Division Bench and what work those Benches shall do. In other words the Judges of the High Court can sit alone or in Division Benches and do such work only as may be allotted to them by an order of or in accordance with the directions of the Chief Justice. That necessarily means that it is not within the competence or domain of any Single or Division Bench of the Court to give any direction to the Registry in that behalf which will run contrary to the directions of the Chief Justice. Therefore in the scheme of things judicial discipline demands that in the event a Single Judge or a Division Bench considers that a particular case requires to be listed before it for valid reasons, it should direct the Registry to obtain appropriate orders from the Chief Justice. The puis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.............. 59. This Court has recorded its conclusion in Para 59, which is to the following effect: 59. From the preceding discussion the following broad CONCLUSIONS emerge. This, of course, is not to be treated as a summary of our judgment and the conclusions should be read with the text of the judgment: (1) That the administrative control of the High Court vests in the Chief Justice alone. On the judicial side, however, he is only the first amongst the equals. (2) That the Chief Justice is the master of the roster. He alone has the prerogative to constitute benches of the court and allocate cases to the benches so constituted. (3) That the puisne Judges can only do that work as is allotted to them by the Chief Justice or under his directions. (4) That till any determination made by the Chief Justice lasts, no Judge who is to sit singly can sit in a Division Bench and no Division Bench can be split up by the Judges constituting the bench themselves and one or both the Judges constituting such bench sit singly and take up any other kind of judicial business not otherwise assigned to them by or under the directions of the Chief Justice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he judicial work and the judicial business would not hinge on the whim of a litigant. In Paragraph 26, following has been laid down: 26. ...............................The Chief Justice's prerogative to constitute benches and assignment of judicial business would not hinge on the whim of a litigant. 62. This Court further in State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. v. Neeraj Chaubey and Ors. (2010) 10 SCC 320 held that power of Chief Justice of allocation of business of the High Court flows not only from the provisions contained in Sub-section (3) of Section 51 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, but inheres in him in the very nature of things. Following was observed in Para 9: 9. ..................If the Judges were free to choose their jurisdiction or any choice was given to them to do whatever case they may like to hear and decide, the machinery of the Court would collapse and the judicial work of the Court would cease by generation of internal strife on account of hankering for a particular jurisdiction or a particular case........................... 63. It was further cautioned in the above case that in event the distribution is not done by the Chief Jus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ressed to the President, resign his office; (b) a Judge may be removed from his office in the manner provided in Clause (4). 65. Justice Bhagwati, speaking for majority in S.P. Gupta's case (supra) while interpreting Article 124(2) laid down following in Paragraph 31: 31................The Petitioners contended that the Central Government may, if it thinks fit, consult one or more of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts or it may not consult any and where it does not, the Chief Justice of India will be the only constitutional functionary required to be consulted and in such a case the Central Government must accept the opinion of the Chief Justice of India as binding upon it. We do not think this argument is well founded. In the first place it is not justified by the plain language of Clause (2) of Article 124. This Clause clearly provides for consultation as a mandatory exercise and the only matter which is left to the discretion of the Central Government is the choice of the Judge of the Supreme Court and the High Courts who may be consulted. The words "as the President may deem necessary" qualify only the preceding words "such of the Ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on that we think it is unwise to entrust power in any significant or sensitive area to a single individual, howsoever high or important may be the office which he is occupying. There must be checks and controls in the exercise of every power, particularly when it is a power to make important and crucial appointments and it must be exercisable by plurality of hands rather than be vested in a single individual. That is perhaps the reason why the Constitution-makers introduced the requirement in Clause (2) of Article 124 that one or more Judges out of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts should be consulted in making appointment of a Supreme Court Judge. But even with this provision, we do not think that the safeguard is adequate because it is left to the Central Government to select any one or more of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts for the purpose of consultation. We would rather suggest that there must be a collegium to make recommendation to the President in regard to appointment of a Supreme Court or High Court Judge. The recommending authority should be more broad based and there should be consultation with wider interests. If the collegi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e formation of his opinion. This provision in Article 124(2) is the basis for the existing convention which requires the Chief Justice of India to consult some Judges of the Supreme Court before making his recommendation. This ensures that the opinion of the Chief Justice of India is not merely his individual opinion, but an opinion formed collectively by a body of men at the apex level in the judiciary. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 67. In Third Judges case, Special Reference No. 1 of 1998, (1998) 7 SCC 739, approving the construction as was put by this Court in Second Judges case, Justice S.P. Bharucha, as he then was, in Para 160 held that collegium should consist of the Chief Justice of India and four senior most puisne judges of the Supreme Court. In Para 44, following answers were recorded: 44. The questions posed by the Reference are now answered, but we should emphasise that the answers should be read in conjunction with the body of this opinion: 1. The expression "consultation with the Chief Justice of India" in Articles 217(1) and 222(1) of the Constitution of India requires consultation with a plurality of Judges in the formation of the opinion of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e approval of the President. The word practice and procedure of the Court are wide enough to include practice and procedure relating to preparation of roster and allocation of cases. The Rules framed by Supreme Court Under Article 145 specifically refers the Chief Justice in Chapter VI as noted above, the Chief Justice, who is to nominate the bench for hearing every case, appeal or matter. There is no indication in any of the constitutional provisions or Rules framed thereunder that for allocation of cases and formation of benches, Chief Justice should be read as collegium. For reading Chief Justice as collegium, Under Article 124, there was a constitutional basis as observed above. This Court had also on several occasions, noticed and expressed reasons for holding that it is the only prerogative of the Chief Justice to allocate cases and nominate the bench. This Court in State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. v. Neeraj Chaubey and Ors. (supra) has made following weighty observations: 9. ..................If the Judges were free to choose their jurisdiction or any choice was given to them to do whatever case they may like to hear and decide, the machinery of the Court would colla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inate Benches for hearing cases or appeal. Non-containing of any specific provision in the Constitution empowering the Chief Justice to frame the roster to allocate the cases is inconsequential since the entire subject was to be covered by Rules made Under Article 145. 75. In considering the submissions raised in this case, we are reminded of prophetic words of Mr. Justice Holmes in Northern Securities Co. v. United States, 48 LAWYERS' EDITION U.S. 196 (1903). Holmes, J. said: Great cases, like hard cases, make bad law. For great cases are called great, not by reason of their real importance in shaping the law of the future, but because of some accident of immediate overwhelming interest which appeals to the feelings and distorts the judgment. These immediate interests exercise a kind of hydraulic pressure which makes what previously was clear seem doubtful, and before which even well settled principles of law will bend. 76. Our views as expressed above are fortified by a recent Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms v. Union of India and Anr., (2018) 1 SCC 196 and three Judge Bench judgment of this Court dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cases as enumerated in the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner candidly submitted that Petitioner is not questioning any order or judgment referred to in the writ petition. The endeavour of the writ Petitioner is to find out an appropriate procedure for proper and fair distribution of cases and constitution of Benches. 81. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has also referred to and relied on various international practices. During the submission he has referred to practices pertaining to case assignment in United Kingdom Supreme Court, High Court of Australia, Supreme Court of Canada and the practice in United States Supreme Court. The practices and function of each Court are different which has been evolved by time looking to particular background and set of facts. The practice of a Court ripens into a convention by passage of time and rich heritage of conventions are time tested which is followed by different Courts. The conventions and practice of the Supreme Court are time tested which practice and conventions of this Court have ripened with time which need not to be tinkered with or imitated from different international practices of different Courts. As noted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elf and not outside. A Judge should be independent of himself. A Judge is a human being who is a bundle of passions and prejudices, likes and dislikes, affection and ill will, hatred and contempt and fear and recklessness. In order to be a successful Judge these elements should be curbed and kept under restraint and that is possible only by education, training, continued practice and cultivation of a sense of humility and dedication to duty. These curbs can neither be bought in the market nor injected into human system by the written or unwritten laws. If these things are there even if any of the protective measures provided by the Constitution and the laws go the independence of the judiciary will not suffer. But with all these measures being there still a Judge may not be independent. It is the inner strength of Judges alone that can save the judiciary. The life of a Judge does not really call for great acts of self-sacrifice; but it does insist upon small acts of self-denial almost every day. The following sloka explains the true traits of men with discretion which all Judges should possess: [Let men trained in ethics or morality, insult or praise; let lakshmi (wealth) ....