APPOINTMENT OF HIGH COURT JUDGES AND IMPEACHMENT

INTRODUCTION:

Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014

Democracy runs on the principle of checks and balances.If one of the organ is going wrong,then the other
organs check its lower organ through their principle.Random and arbitrary selection of judges creates bias
in the democracy which is a clear violation of the rule of law by the judiciary For the appointment of high
court judges the government brought the National Judicial Appointment Commission . NJAC
replaces the 22-year-old collegium system which made the selection process for Supreme
Court and high court judges. The collegium system, which used to appoint judges faced the
criticisms for being opaque.

Composition of NJAC

CJI
2 Senior Most Judges
2 Eminent Persons (Selected by CJI, PM,& LOP)
Law Minister.

Selection of High Courts judges :

Chief Justices of HCs:

The Chief Justice of a High Court will be recommended by NJAC on the basis of seniority
among High Court judges. The ability, merit and other criteria of suitability as specified in the
regulations would also be considered.

Nominations: Nominations from Chief Justice of the concerned High Court will be
considered for the appointments of HC judges.

Eliciting views: The Commission shall forward the nominated names for appointment of HC
judges to the Chief Justice of the concerned HCs for his views.The Chief Justice of HC shall
consult two senior most judges of that HC and also any other judges or advocates as per the
regulations.

Views of the Governor and CM: The NJAC shall elicit the views of the Governor and Chief
Minister of the state before making recommendations. Veto power of members: The NJAC
shall not recommend a person for appointment if any two members of the Commission do not
agree to such recommendation.

Merits of the act

NJAC ensures transperability and accountability. It also makes the executive to select
judiciary where as in collegium system the judiciary selected the judges. It is purely based on
merit. NJAC also has provision for veto making it non arbitrary. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar was
1 | Page
against the system of judges selecting judges by saying that to allow the Chief Justice
practically a veto upon the appointment of judges is really to transfer the authority to the
Chief Justice which we are not prepared to vest to the President or government of the day.
Hence the system provided in the act is much better, NJAC is prior to the collegium system
for about 23 years

Flaws in the Act

NJAC Act is Unconstitutional. About 70 persons prescribe the appointment of eminent

persons and 65 of them require special knowledge. There is no requirement that the eminent
person on the commission should have any knowledge of law.

Article 14 of the constitution provides for non- arbitrariness in the selection and decision
making of judges. The procedure for appointment of two eminent persons is not provided
anywhere. A process that fails to provide any criteria for evaluation of eminence violates the
fundamental right of protection against arbitrary action. One possibility is that Prime Minister
and the leader of the Opposition would join hands and make the CJIs opinion irrelevant. Veto
Power The veto power given to any two members of NJAC allow an arbitrary approach to
decision making. There is no criteria on which veto can be exercised. Any two members may
join hands and misuse the veto power. The process of transfer of judges as prescribed in this
act is also in question.

Collegium system:

The Collegium system is one where the Chief Justice of India and a forum of four senior-most judges of the
Supreme Court recommend appointments and transfers of judges. However, it has no place in the Indian
Constitution.

The system was evolved through Supreme Court judgments in the Three Judges Cases: S.P. Gupta case
(December 30, 1981)

What is the NJAC?

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) is a constitutional body proposed to replace the
present Collegium system of appointing judges.

The Supreme Court rejected the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act and the 99th
Constitutional Amendment which sought to give politicians and civil society a final say in the appointment of
judges to the highest courts.
2 | Page
Research question:

1.What are the valid reasons for having collegium system?

2.What is advantage of NJAC over collegium system?

3.Explaining the constituency of NJAC

4.Can parliament interfere in the appointment of high court judges?

5.Is the current system of appointment of judges a feasible solution?

IMPEACHMENT:

Impeachment in law is one of the most noticeably awful kept Indian mystery yet the most dreaded one.
The law over the time has come to procure an essential position in the administration. They have turned
out to be progressively capable, powers that were not planned for them in the constitution. On account of
30 years of coalition government the official got to be feeble and surrendered the ground to legal. With a
solid government at the middle this will undoubtedly happen.

Research objective:

The collegium system of appointment of high court judges was the former system which was not under the
constitution. As a reform , a constitutional body was created called as NJAC National Judicial Appointments
Commission but the reform itself has become a flaw in this case. To research the merits and demerits of
both the systems through analytical method of research

Webliography:

1.http://googleweblight.com/?lite_url=http://m.thehindu.com/news/national/the-validity-of-the-collegium-
system/article6148870.ece&ei=4smuhpWf&lc=en-
IN&geid=10&s=1&m=151&ts=1455647929&sig=ALL1Aj6d2FcZfEb8O9Rgc7Ki5lrJfl3Zcw

2.http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-way-to-judicial-independence/article7896653.ece

3 | Page