Plea had questioned the process adopted in passing the act that would replace judges’ collegiums
GN Bureau | April 7, 2015
A three-judge bench of justices A R Dave, J Chelameswar and Madan B Lokur, which had reserved its judgement on the National Judicial Appointment Commission act (NJAC) and constitutional amendment of Article 124 A, has referred the matter to a five-judges constitutional bench.
The court also refused to stay operation of NJAC Act meant to replace collegium system of judges appointing judges.
The verdict was reserved on March 24 after Attorney General (AG) Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Centre, wrapped up his arguments saying that the pleas be dismissed as they were "premature" and "academic" in nature.
The Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA)and Bar Association of India (BAI), represented by Fali Nariman and Anil Divan respectively, had opposed the two Acts and sought that direction be passed to maintain status quo, saying the entire process would otherwise become irreversible.
However, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) had strongly favoured the government on laws on appointment of judges in higher judiciary, saying there has been "unanimity" that the present mechanism has "serious pitfalls".
There is unanimity in the view that there are serious pitfalls in the collegium system," SCBA president and senior advocate Dushyant Dave had submitted.
Those opposing the new law had submitted that the issue should be referred to a Constitution Bench of five judges. Nariman and Divan had contended that as per constitutional scheme, the NJAC Act should not have been passed ahead of enabling constitutional amendment. "Where was the authority to pass the NJAC Act," Nariman had asked. According to him the Act should have been passed after the constitutional amendment.
However, the AG had argued that the power of Parliament to make law is "plenary" and hence, the methodology adopted by the legislature in clearing the law on the floor of the House cannot be "tested" by the court. Rohatgi submitted that "Only end product can be examined by the courts and it is irrelevant that this Act was passed earlier and that Act was passed later."
"Only an Act, after notification, can be tested in the court of law and not the procedures adopted by the Parliament," the Attorney General had submitted.
The apex court had said it could proceed on the merits of the matter only after deciding whether the petitions challenging the validity of the act and the NJAC act were maintainable or not.
Ramin Jahanbegloo is a renowned philosopher who is now associated with the Jindal Global University. His latest work, The Decline of Civilization, calls for countering the ‘decivilising’ tendencies of our times by returning to Gandhi and Tagore. Jahanbegloo answered s
Should CBSE prepone the board exams?
In this nationalistic age, sports seem to play an important role, and in India, this can be seen during cricket matches. For most, a victory symbolises prestige and supremacy. On Sunday, India lost to Pakistan in the final match of the ICC Champions Trophy. The defea
“I am from a poor family” written with red paint on a yellow background outside homes that draw ration under the NFSA in Rajasthan’s Dausa district is a clear case of human rights violation. Poverty in itself is a human rights issue as the poor face malnut
Prime minister Narendra Modi’s July 5-6 visit to Israel will be of “huge importance”, stressed Israeli ambassador Daniel Carmon who added that his country is ready to offer New Delhi whatever it requires for joint defence production under the Make in India initiative. “We
Media trials, under the guise of debates, have become the new normal today. These ‘media debates’, which seem more like screaming matches, completely overlook the nuances of the issue being discussed, said justice HL Dattu, chairperson, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) at a workshop in B