Collegium system of appointing judges is the law of land, Centre has to approve it: SC

The Supreme Court of India. (File image)

The Supreme Court on November 28 observed that the collegium system of appointing of judges for higher judiciary is the law of the land and also stressed that the Centre has to approved it, according to a CNBC-TV18 report.

"Once the Collegium reiterates a name, the Centre has to approve it," SC noted, adding, "If today Centre refuses to obey the law, tomorrow some other section of population can also refuse to comply with certain laws," as per the report.

The apex court had in its 2015 verdict struck down the NJAC Act and the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014, leading to the revival of the Collegium system of existing judges appointing judges to constitutional courts.

The top court also asked the Attorney General of India and the Solicitor General to ensure that the law of the land laid down by this court is followed.

Moreover the bench also observed that there is a delay of months by the Centre in considering the appointment of judges proposed by the Collegium. The top court took a jibe on the Centre saying that it appears that the government is unhappy that the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) did not pass Constitutional muster.

"It appears that the Centre is unhappy that its law NJAC Act (National Judicial Appointments Commission) could not pass the judicial test but that cannot be the reason not to comply with what is the law of the land," the court said.

To this, it warned that the Centre is "frustrating" the process by sitting on files, which is hurting the system.

Observing that there are names pending for more than one and half year, SC stated, "Timelines have gone completely haywire and they need to be respected." It also stated that last few months appointments to SC, HCs are on a standstill.

Earlier this month, the apex court had expressed displeasure over the Centre keeping pending the names recommended for appointment as judges in the higher judiciary, including those reiterated by the apex court Collegium, saying it was “not acceptable”.

The top court ]had observed that the method of keeping names on hold is becoming “some sort of a device” to compel the persons, whose names have been recommended for appointment as judges in the higher judiciary, to withdraw their consent.

The bench issued notice to the incumbent Secretary (Justice) of the Union Law Ministry seeking response on a plea alleging “wilful disobedience” of time frame laid down to facilitate timely appointment in the apex court’s April 20 last year order.

In its April last year order, the apex court had said the Centre should appoint judges within three-four weeks if the Collegium reiterates its recommendations unanimously.