English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges’ appointments

Published

8 years ago

on

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges' appointments

A case relating to judges’ vacancies in high courts of states of Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura on Friday, May 4, witnessed an open clash between the judiciary and the executive in a manifestation of the tension that has built up between the two branches of the State over appointment of judges.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta, hearing a transfer plea of a litigant from Manipur, pulled up the Centre for not clearing the names recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium for appointment as judges, causing undue harassment to litigants. Terming it “an unfortunate situation”, the SC had issued notice to the Centre on April 17.

On Friday the Attorney General KK Venugopal assured the court that appointments to high courts in the northeast would be made soon, but said that will not resolve the problem of vacancies in all high courts. “Collegium has to look at the future. Recommendations need to be made keeping in mind vacancies that will arise six months later,” Venugopal said, pointing out that though some High Courts had 40 per cent vacancy, only a few names were being recommended for appointments. “Collegium doesn’t send us the names and the government is told it is being tardy in processing,” he said.

“Why is the Collegium recommending fewer names when there are so many vacancies in high courts?” asked Venugopal.

The bench told Venugopal that this did not give the government the liberty to sit over names sent long back.

The two-judge bench asked the AG: “Tell us, how many names (recommended by the Collegium) are pending with you.”

The AG replied: “I will have to find out”.

The bench shot back: “This is the problem with you (the government). When it comes to attacking (the) judiciary, you have the data. But when it comes to the government then you say you don’t have the figures.”

The petitioner wanted the Supreme Court’s permission to challenge an order of a single judge of the Manipur High Court before the Gauhati High Court. He claimed he could not file an appeal in the Manipur High Court since it had only two judges, one of whom had given the order. The Supreme Court had sought the Attorney General’s assistance in the matter.

Venugopal said that on April 19, the Collegium recommended a name for appointment as Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court. He said he had spoken to the authorities and they had promised that the appointment would be notified “shortly”.

“Your shortly… can be several months. What are you doing?” the bench asked the AG.

Venugopal replied the government was serious about the appointment and that the same would be done in 10 days, said a report in The Hindustan Times (HT).

The bench said the situation in the North-East was ‘critical’. “In Meghalaya, there is only one judge against four. Even Tripura has just two against four. Recommendation was also made for Meghalaya. What happened to that?… People of North-East are suffering… What are they supposed to do? Should they come here to get their cases transferred to other High Courts and spend money to hire lawyers there?” the bench said.

The Attorney General remarked, in a lighter vein, that the National Judicial Appointments Commission — the NJAC Act was invalidated by the Supreme Court in 2015 — may have been more suitable for dealing with the appointment of judges.

Justice Lokur said the bench was only concerned with appointments to High Courts in the North-East and asked the Attorney General to file an affidavit explaining the position in the next 10 days.

Justice MB Lokur is one of the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court and a member of the collegium that nominates judges to the apex court. This was the first time a member of the collegium has spoken out over the stand-off between the collegium and the government on the appointment of judges, said the HT report.

Last week, while the Centre cleared the appointment of Indu Malhotra as a judge of the Supreme Court, it asked the Collegium to reconsider the recommendation that Justice KM Joseph from the Uttarakhand high court be elevated to the top court. The Collegium had recommended names of both judges together, in the first week of January.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

LPU students protest over reported rape allegation, police call it rumour

Students at Lovely Professional University protested over a reported rape allegation involving a worker, with police describing the claim as a rumour.

Published

15 hours ago

on

September 27, 2026

By

Students of Lovely Professional University (LPU) in Punjab staged a protest after an allegation involving the reported rape of a student by a worker at the university surfaced.

The protest led to disruption around the university, with students taking to the streets and blocking the Jalandhar-Phagwara National Highway, according to the report.

The allegation triggered anger among students, who demanded action over the reported incident.

Police describe rape claim as rumour

Police, however, described the rape claim as a rumour, indicating that the allegation had not been established as a confirmed incident.

The distinction is important because the reported sexual assault allegation should not be treated as a confirmed rape unless investigators or other authoritative sources establish that fact.

The protests nevertheless continued as students sought clarity and action over the issue.

Protest disrupts traffic

The student demonstration also affected traffic on the Jalandhar-Phagwara National Highway. The protest brought attention to the allegations and the concerns being raised by students at the university.

With police calling the claim a rumour, further verification and investigation would be necessary to establish what actually happened.

Continue Reading

India News

INDIA bloc likely to meet on September 30 over Gyanesh Kumar row

INDIA bloc parties are likely to meet in New Delhi on September 30 amid growing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Published

1 day ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

Rahul-Gandhi

Opposition parties belonging to the INDIA bloc are set to meet in New Delhi on September 30 to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and a proposed removal motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The proposed meeting comes amid growing coordination among opposition parties over the functioning of the poll panel and demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The parties are also discussing a possible joint response to the developments.

Why is the INDIA bloc meeting being planned?

The INDIA bloc meeting on September 30 comes amid reports of objections within the Election Commission over certain decisions and orders related to the SIR exercise. 

According to the report, Opposition leaders have been discussing a coordinated response to their concerns over the Election Commission and the electoral-roll revision process. 

The issue is also expected to be discussed at the Congress Working Committee meeting scheduled for September 29, a day before the proposed INDIA bloc meeting.

Gyanesh Kumar removal demand in focus

The demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has become a major point of contention between the Opposition and the Election Commission.

The CPI(M), CPI and CPI(ML)-Liberation have demanded Kumar’s removal and an immediate halt to the SIR exercise. Congress has also intensified its criticism of the CEC.

Opposition parties are also working on a fresh removal motion against Gyanesh Kumar. The September 30 meeting is expected to finalise the strategy for the motion, including the collection of signatures. According to the report, this would be the Opposition’s third such attempt. 

What is the SIR controversy?

The political dispute is linked to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, or SIR.

The controversy intensified following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on several occasions concerning decisions and orders related to the SIR process.

The Election Commission has said that differing views and observations are part of normal deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures, while stating that the final decisions on the SIR were taken unanimously. 

TMC and Left parties coordinate over the issue

The developments have also brought the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M) together on the Election Commission issue, despite their political differences in West Bengal.

CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby proposed an immediate meeting to discuss a joint strategy. According to the report, Mamata Banerjee spoke with M A Baby and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, after which the leaders settled on September 30 for the meeting. 

What could be discussed at the September 30 meeting?

The proposed meeting is expected to focus on:

  • Concerns surrounding the Election Commission
  • The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls
  • Opposition demands concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • A possible fresh removal notice against the CEC
  • A coordinated response by INDIA bloc parties

The exact agenda and participation will depend on the discussions among the opposition parties before the proposed meeting.

Continue Reading

India News

“Will die but won’t give up”: Sahil Wakode’s parents urge IIT students to continue fight 

Sahil Wakode’s parents have appealed to IIT Bombay students to continue their fight for justice amid the ongoing investigation into their son’s death.

Published

1 day ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

Sahil Wakode

The parents of IIT Bombay student Sahil Wakode have appealed to students to continue raising their voices and fighting for justice following their son’s death.

Sahil Wakode, a second-year student at IIT Bombay, died in his hostel room on September 18. His death has led to student protests and an ongoing investigation by the Mumbai Crime Branch.

What Sahil Wakode’s parents have alleged

Sahil’s parents have alleged that their son faced caste-based discrimination and harassment at IIT Bombay before his death. They have sought action against those they hold responsible and have demanded a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death.

The family has also called for a CBI inquiry and has sought the arrest of officials named in the case. These remain allegations and are part of the ongoing investigation.

The Mumbai Crime Branch took over the probe after an FIR was registered following the complaint by Sahil’s parents.

IIT Bombay’s position

IIT Bombay has said that Sahil was allegedly caught using a mobile phone during a mid-semester examination and had uploaded the question paper to ChatGPT to seek answers.

The institute has maintained that no disciplinary action had been initiated against him. It said the matter had been discussed with him by the instructor and the Head of the Department, who counselled him and assured him that the incident would not adversely affect his academic career.

The circumstances surrounding Sahil’s death are being investigated by the appropriate authorities.

Investigation continues

The case remains under investigation, with the Mumbai Crime Branch examining the circumstances surrounding Sahil’s death and the allegations made by his family.

His parents have continued to demand justice and action against those they believe were responsible, while the investigation is expected to establish the facts surrounding the case.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com