NEW DELHI: Former CJI D Y Chandrachud was more deferential to the govt than necessary in matters of judicial appointments, former SC judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul has said in his forthcoming book ‘Without Fear Or Favour’, and claimed that he was prevented from hearing petitions for re-examination of the validity of provisions of PMLA.Kaul also claimed Justice Chandrachud had, allegedly under pressure from govt, withdrawn a case from him in which a bench headed by him had questioned delays in implementation of the SC collegium’s resolutions for appointment of judges. This, he said, “troubled him the most” as the case was assigned years ago and was taken away all of a sudden.Reacting to the claims, Justice Chandrachud said, “There was never even a dissent by any member of the collegium over any name during discussions for appointments to the SC.”
‘DYC asked if he should call government on collegium picks’
Sources said resolutions passed by the collegium for appointments to the SC during Justice Chandrachud’s tenure were unanimous and signed by all members of the collegium without recording a single dissent.In this case, a bench of Justices Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia had pulled up govt for its alleged pick-and-choose policy in clearing names sent by the collegium and had on Nov 20, 2023, asked why Centre was not transferring four judges from Gujarat HC and not appointing two Sikh lawyers for Punjab and Haryana HC as recommended by the collegium. The case was thereafter taken away from his bench and it has not been listed in the last three years.In an interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Justice Kaul claimed the former CJI took him aside during a collegium meeting and asked whether he should telephone govt to ascertain its views on the proposed appointments. Justice Kaul said pre-approval from govt before discussions in the collegium was a matter of concern.“This has unfortunately become a practice of names being discussed, and some kind of previous discussion with govt. That used to happen. It has been happening, I think before CJI Chandrachud and after. That is why it troubles me,” he said, adding that there was nothing wrong in holding consultations with govt, but it should happen only after the collegium’s decision and not before.Asked whether Justice Chandrachud was too deferential to govt, Justice Kaul said, “There is a judicial side and there is an administrative side of the Chief Justice of India. I wouldn’t be concerned with the judicial side. I believe he had both the intellectual heft and the capacity and hard work to do so. But in consultations with govt and collaboration, I felt he was more deferential than necessary to carry it forward.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
”Justice Kaul said he tried to discourage Justice Chandrachud from discussing everything with govt beforehand as it could create its own problems. Asked whether Justice Chandrachud failed to live up to the high expectations from him, Justice Kaul said, “I would say that expectations were higher from him.”TOI has reported how Justice Kaul had vigorously and successfully pushed many names for judgeship as part of the SC and HC collegiums and three of his proposals had met with resistance from other members of the panel. The then CJI had tactically refrained from holding collegium meetings to avoid embarrassing situations.In reply to the TOI article, Justice Kaul had sent a rejoinder and said, “There was no question of insistence of appointment of those suggested by me and all recommendations have been made by consensus. That other collegium members had reservations and I pushed the names, thus, seem to be a flight of your imagination.”
