Justice RM Lodha, the recently appointed Chief justice of India, has strongly opposed the culture of adjournment in court and said that hearing of cases will not be adjourned unless and until a valid reason is cited by the lawyer. He said that adjournment must not be made unless a lawyer falls very sick.
The strict measure from the three judge bench which is headed by Justice Lodha came after a request for adjournment of a scheduled hearing on Monday was made by advocate Shivaji M Yadav who is also the president of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association.
Justice Lodha also confirmed on the order of a new process according to which the request for adjournment will be accepted for referral only if it is made much in advance and will be decided by a registrar of the Supreme Court. The court will not spend its judicial time on such nuances he added.
In an reply to Jadav’s comment to inform lawyers about the Chief Justice’s decision, the bench said it would imply the decision quickly for proper utilization of judicial time, especially when there are heavy pending of cases.
NEW DELHI: The government has consulted the law ministry whether an official residence could be provided to former chief justice of India P Sathasivam who retired on Saturday.
Sources said after a request from the former CJI for a house, the government consulted the ministry as the former CJI has not been appointed to any other official position which could merit an official residence.
Though no communication has been sent to the former CJI on this issue so far, sources in the Law ministry said it will not be possible for the government to provide Justice Sathasivam with an official residence as there is no such provision in the rules that govern apex court judges’ salaries and other service conditions.
Justice Sathasivam has been succeeded by Justice R M Lodha. Before his retirement, Justice Sathasivam had also expressed views that the government should consider giving fixed tenure of two years to the CJI, an opinion his successor didn’t agree with.
The issue of judges’ appointments and giving fixed tenure had been discussed earlier too, but the government was never in favour of giving fixed tenure to chief justices of high courts or the CJI. A Constitutional amendment bill was introduced in Parliament, proposing increase in the retirement age of HC judges from 62 years at present to 65 years. The increase in the HC judges’ age was intended to bring them at par with the Supreme Court judges.
…………………TNN | Apr 29, 2014, 04.44 AM IST
The High Court Registrar General has transferred 141 District, Civil and Senior Judges including Lokayukta Special Court Judge N K Sudhindra Rao and Central Bureau of Investigation Special Court Judge Shreeshananda to various courts in the state. Registrar General B A Patil passed the orders on Saturday.
Judge Sudhindra Rao is transferred as the Principal Judge of Tumkur City Civil and Session Court while Judge V G Bopaiah, who was a judge in the Hassan City Civil and Session Court will take Rao’s place.
Judge H B Prabhakar Shastri, who was Principal Judge of Tumkur City Civil and Session Court, has been transferred as a member of the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Authority and he has been replaced by Judge Sudhindra Rao.
Judge Shreeshananda, who was the special CBI Court judge, has been transferred to the Haveri City Civil and Session Court. He has been replaced by Judge Mahalakshmi Nerale.
Judge V V Angadi, who was a director at the Bangalore Mediation Centre is transferred as Principal Judge of the City Civil and Session Court in Bangalore in place of Principal Judge Veeranna G Thigadi, who will be retiring on April 30.
All judges have been directed to report to their new postings from May 31.
There is no need for a fixed tenure for chief justice of India, says Justice Lodha
Prabhati Nayak Mishra @dna
New Delhi: Justice Rajendra Mal Lodha, who was sworn in as 41st Chief Justice of India (CJI) on Sunday, said as head of the institution his priority will be appointment of good judges for which wider consultation of judges outside collegium and also some senior-most lawyers of bar is required.
“My mantra is to appoint good judges in high courts and Supreme Court and rest will follow. If we have good judges, then in a few years’ time we will have an entirely different complexion of judiciary,” said Justice Lodha, 64 year-old, while briefing media after taking oath at Rashtrapati Bhavan.
He said that he will soon write to all the high courts to consult more judges outside collegium and also at least three noted lawyers with impeccable character for the proposed names to fill the vacancies of judges.
Concurring with his predecessor on collegium system, Justice Lodha said this is the suitable system for recommendation of judges. “I don’t think any other suitable system is there. Collegium is statutory. However, to have a better and suitable candidate for the judiciary, a wide consultation with the senior lawyers with impeccable character would definitely help. Because they see the conduct of a lawyer outside the court,” Justice Lodha, who is to retire on September 27, said.
Justice Lodha succeeded Justice P Sathasivam who demitted office on Saturday after nine months as the head of the judiciary. He will have a tenure of five months as CJI.
On reservation in judiciary, Justice Lodha said he is not in favour of it.
With regard to the pendency of cases in the top court, he said the criminal matters in the apex court will be heard on a priority basis for which three benches will be exclusively devoted to criminal cases, including bail pleas of the accused persons.
Taking a different stand on fixed tenure for the post of CJI for at least two years, Justice Lodha said he is not in favour of it. “The fixed tenure is bound to affect the next member. If there is a fixed tenure of CJI, then the legitimate expectation of other judges would be taken away,” he said.
Justice Lodha said he does not favour the idea of having another branch of the top court saying “no country in the world has separate branch of Supreme Court including the US.
“Because the country is so big and the voluminous work, the top court judges should not sit in division. We have 31 judges at present…”
Answering a query on the sexual harassment cases involving judges making dent on the institution, CJI said, “The court has adopted a mechanism and the Vishakha guidelines have been followed. If there is any lapse, the court will ensure not to have any lapse…. ”While, talking about judicial over reach into executive’s function, the head of judiciary said, “All three organs should work within the framework prescribed under the constitution… Judiciary has respected the government domain. Many a times it did not intervene in policy matters. If there is any fundamental rights violation, then only the court intervenes.”
Justice Lodha is heading a bench which is monitoring CBI’s probe into coal blocks allocation scam. He had also ordered making CBI free from any political interference.
Born on September 28, 1949 in Jodhpur, Justice Lodha is the son of former Rajasthan high court judge Justice S K Mal Lodha. He enrolled with the Bar Council of Rajasthan in February, 1973 and practised law in the Rajasthan high court. He was elevated as a permanent judge of the Rajasthan high court on January 31, 1994 and transferred to the Bombay High Court on February 16, 1994. He was sworn in as the Chief Justice of the Patna high court on May 13, 2008 and elevated to the apex court on Dec 17, 2008.
Published Date: Apr 28, 2014
Copyright restricted. For reprint rights click here
NEW DELHI, Apr 26(Agencies): A sitting Supreme Court judge has written to the outgoing Chief Justice of India objecting to the proposed appointment of top bureaucrat and union Home Secretary Anil Goswami’s advocate wife as a judge in the Jammu & Kashmir High Court.
A report published in a Delhi-based newspaper on Saturday said that Justice T S Thakur, who is in line to be the country’s top judge and could occupy the post after CJI-designate Justice R M Lodha and his successor Justice H L Dattu demit office in 2015, said in a letter to the Chief Justice P Sathasivam last month that he was not convinced about Neeru Goswami’s professional capabilities, sources familiar with the matter have told.
Justice Thakur cited Goswami’s lack of competence, private practice and experience in handling civil and criminal matters to underline what he said was her unsuitability for the judge’s position, they said.
Meanwhile, two sitting SC judges have told agencies about what they said were improper efforts to influence the appointment, including calls made by candidate’s relatives to SC judges.
“Anil Goswami and his father-in-law had called on two sitting Supreme Court judges and mentioned his wife’ appointment,” one of them told agencies , adding that a cabinet minister had also telephoned another Supreme Court judge to favorably consider Goswami’s appointment.
Thakur declined to comment and a questionnaire emailed to Chief Justice P Sathasivam’s office requesting confirmation about the letter went unanswered.
A questionnaire to the home secretary’s office for his comments by this agencies, but a home ministry spokesperson said since it was a personal matter, Goswami “would not like to comment on it”.
Telephone calls to Goswami’s mobile and to his wife’s number in Jammu went unanswered. Goswami, who has been home secretary since July 2013, was a personal pick of Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, who had a fractious relationship with his predecessor and now BJP member and Lok Sabha candidate R K Singh.
Thakur was earlier a judge in the J&K High Court and it is common practice to seek the views of Judges of the SC in judicial appointments to HCs where they may have worked in the past.
As a convention, after recommendations to appoint judges is received from high court, the chief justice consults judges who represent the state or have done a stint in High court concerned. Thakur is from J&K and had practiced in the high court there and was in 1994 appointed as an additional judge in the court.
…………News Updated at : Sunday, April 27, 2014
Prabhati Nayak Mishra @dna
New Delhi: Just a day before he demits ofiice, Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam on Friday told dna that if his name is unanimously proposed without any controversy for the post of Lokpal by the selection committee, he has no objection to accepting the offer as a post-retirement job.
“Any job that is offered to a retired CJI must be befitting the post of CJI,” Justice Sathasivam, who is scheduled to retire on Saturday after nine months as head of the institution, said.
“If all the members of selection committee unanimously agree and there is no controversy to my name, I will certainly consider it,” the outgoing chief justice said.
On selection of judges, Justice Sathasivam favoured continuing with the present system of collegium for appointments to higher judiciary.
Speaking about the vacancies of judges in various high courts, he said that he had written letters to the Centre to fill the posts and during his tenure as chief justice about 90 judges have been appointed and for Supreme Court about four judges have been appointed.
Further, Justice Sathasivam, who served the judiciary for over 18 years, said that even all the vacancies of the apex court staff have been filled up by him.
“Whatever was possible in my nine-month tenure, I have done it,” he said while expressing his feeling that there should be fixed tenure for the post of CJI.
Expressing concern over the complaints of sexual harassment lodged by the women lawyers against some male colleagues, CJI said that he has taken action against culprits by barring them from entering the premises. He, however, refrained from commenting anything on a similar complaint against a retired judge of this court.
In the evening while addressing the lawyers from Supreme Court Bar, Justice Sathasivam, in his six-year stint, said frivilous PIL should not be entertained by the judges.
He said knowledgeable and prudent judges are required for the judiciary.
Talking about the budget for the institution, CJI said the budget sanctioned for the judiciary is inadequate and he has also written to the Centre for more budget to meet the needs of the court for effective function.
Published Date: Apr 26, 2014
The Supreme Court today upheld the constitutional validity of amendment in UP Lokayukta Act for fixing eight-year tenure for the anti-corruption ombudsman.
A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam said appointment of Justice N K Mehrotra (retd) as Lokayukta is valid and directed the state government to take steps for selecting new incumbent within six months.
Justice Mehrotra was appointed as Lokayukta for the state on March 16, 2006 for a period of six years and the government granted him a two-year extension by amending the Act under which the tenure was extended to eight years or till a successor took over.
“We hold that Justice Mehrotra is duly holding the office of Lokayukta under a valid law enacted by the competent legislature – the Uttar Pradesh Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas Act, 1975 as amended by the Uttar Pradesh Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas (Amendment) Act, 2012.
“However, we direct the state to take all endeavors for selecting the new incumbent for the office of Lokayukta and Up-Lokayuktas as per the provisions of the Act preferably within a period of six months from today,” it said.
The bench said the amendment Act was enacted by a competent legislature with legislative intent to provide a term of eight years to Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta, whether present or future, to ensure effective implementation of the Act.
“We are also satisfied that the aforesaid extension of the term of Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta from six years to eight years is a matter of legislative policy and it cannot be narrowed down by saying that the same was enacted only for the benefit of Respondent No 2 (Mehrotra),” it said.
…………… Press Trust of India | <news:geo_locations>New Delhi
April 24, 2014 Last Updated at 20:04 IST