Urban Mirror Correspondent
New Delhi, Aug 2: With the Union government pointing out “nepotism and partiality†in the appointment of judges in the high courts and Supreme Court, the Lok Gathbandhan Party (LGP) today demanded a thorough investigation into all the appointments made during the last 30 years. The LGP said the media reports on favouritism in these appointments is quite disturbing and should be settled in the larger interest of the judiciary and in turn in the interest of our countrymen.
The spokesperson of the party said here on Thursday that the Union Government’s report to the SC collegiums, revealing the relationship of those advocates whose names have been recommended for judgeship of Allahabad High Court, with either the sitting or the retired judges, has raised many an eyebrows over the level playing field for other equally competent advocates. The spokesperson thus said that an investigation is required to find out the prevailing practice in these appointments over all these years. The spokesperson said this is not the question of just Allahabad High Court but also of other HCs in the country, therefore the probe should cover all the high courts in the country. Quoting the media report the spokesperson said it was also shocking that advocates of a particular community were given preference in the recommendation and there was negligible representation to SC, ST, OBC and the Muslim minority.
The spokesperson said that like the complaints from Allahabad Bar Association against these recommendations, in 2013 advocates of Punjab and Haryana High Court had also raised similar issues against the decision of collegiums in recommending the names of kith and kin of the judges. The spokesperson said in its memorandum to the then President of India Pranab Mukherjee the advocates had said “ “the independence and integrity of the Indian judiciary has been put at stake by the collegiums of the Punjab and Haryana High Court while recommending the names of advocates for elevation as judges. The reason for recommending such names puts a big question mark on the decision of the collegiums, which seems to have based it on considerations rather than the merit and integrity of the candidates… It has now become a matter of practice and convenience to recommend the names of advocates who are the sons, daughters, relatives and juniors of former judges and chief justices.”
The spokesperson said the lawyers fraternity all over the country, highlighting a serious conflict of interest and issues with propriety, appeared to be quite agitated over perpetuation of “judicial dynastiesâ€. The spokesperson said the current method of judicial appointments should be re-evaluated to restore the confidence of the people in the whole judicial process.
