"Unfinished Work...": Selection Of Supreme Court Judges Comes To A Halt. Here's Why

The process of selecting four more judges for the Supreme Court has come to a halt after the central government set in motion the nomination of the next Chief Justice. Earlier, two of the five judges on the collegium that decides on these appointments had objected to how the process was being taken forward, using letters, after final decisions could not made by meeting in person. 

While one appointment was okayed last month, the “unfinished work” of appointing four others is now “closed”, says the latest resolution of the collegium.

Headed by the Chief Justice, UU Lalit, the collegium has the five most senior judges as members, of whom Justice DY Chandrachud — who is next in line to become CJI — and Justice S Abdul Nazeer had disagreed with the idea of taking a decision “by circulation”.

“Informal deliberations had been going on for some time” before a formal meeting was held on September 26, where eleven names were considered,” says the closing resolution of October 9.  

At the September 26 meeting, “there was unanimity of opinion” on choosing Bombay High Court Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta for the Supreme Court, so “a resolution to that effect was passed and the consideration of the names of other 10 judges was deferred till September 30”. 

This was because some collegium members had sought more judgments of the other candidates before deciding. The meeting was thus postponed to September 30 and more judgments were circulated, says the latest resolution. 

Notably, September 26 was the first time that the system of circulating past judgments “and making an objective assessment” was introduced. 

But the postponed meeting on September 30 could not be held as Justice Chandrachud “did not attend”.

It was at this point that the CJI circulated his proposal for the appointments in a letter to the other four members. While Justices SK Kaul and Justice KM Joseph sent replies, Justices Chandrachud and Justice Nazeer wrote back objecting “to the method adopted”.  

“[Their letters] did not disclose any views against any of these candidates,” says the latest resolution. 

CJI Lalit then sought their reasons, or alternatives to the method, in another letter on October 2. Neither of the two judges replied. “The matter was, therefore, ideally suited to have a discussion across the table amongst the judges forming the Collegium,” says the resolution of October 9.  

“In the meantime, a letter […] has been received from the Union Law Minister requesting the CJI to nominate his successor,” it adds. CJI Lalit's tenure ends on November 9.  

“In the circumstances, no further steps need be taken and the unfinished work in the meeting called for September 30, 2022, is closed without there being any further deliberation,” the collegium has eventually resolved. 

This means the remaining appointments can only be made once a new Chief Justice is in place next month.