As reported in the Hindustan Times, the Supreme Court collegium has made a significant departure from tradition by conducting personal interactions with candidates being considered for high court judgeships. This evolution in the judicial appointment process follows a recent controversy involving Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court, whose remarks at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) event sparked widespread criticism.
In light of this, members of the collegium, including Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, emphasized the importance of meeting prospective judges to gain a comprehensive understanding of their suitability for elevation.
“After the meeting with the Allahabad High Court judge and the way that deliberation proceeded, this view got fortified that it was crucial to meet the prospective judges rather than just go by the words on their files,” said a person aware of the matter.
The three-member collegium, comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Bhushan R. Gavai and Surya Kant, personally interacted with candidates being considered for elevation to the high courts of Rajasthan, Allahabad, and Bombay. The candidates, including judicial officers and advocates, were invited to the Supreme Court on Sunday, where the top three judges engaged with them to assess their personalities and suitability.
While personal interactions were practiced during the tenure of then-CJI Dipak Misra in 2018, they had since fallen out of favor. Their revival underscores the collegium’s commitment to transparency and fairness in judicial appointments.
On December 17, the collegium held a meeting with Justice Yadav to review his conduct and determine whether it violated the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct or other ethical benchmarks. Options under consideration reportedly include an in-house inquiry or transferring Justice Yadav to another high court.
The collegium’s proactive approach reflects its resolve to reinforce public confidence in the judiciary and address concerns about impartiality and integrity in the judicial appointment process.
