New Delhi, October 19
Law Minister H.R. Bhardwaj today confirmed that the Supreme Court Collegium has recommended transfers and appointments of eight High Court Chief Justices to the Government but said none of them was based on any “punitive” action.
“The collegium has clearly stated that the transfers are recommended purely on administrative needs in public interests. They are not punitive,” Mr Bhardwaj said in a press conference here today.
When asked specifically about the transfer of Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice B.K. Roy, who allegedly had “differences” with other judges, Mr Bhardwaj said “the Punjab and Haryana High Court controversy is different. It has nothing to do with these transfers.”
“It is a matter of judicial discipline and it is for the judiciary to take action in this regard,” he said.
When asked whether transfer of any other judge from the Punjab and Haryana High Court was expected in the light of 25 of its judges going on mass casual leave on April 19 over the “differences” with Mr Justice Roy, whose transfer to the Patna High Court had been approved by the collegium, Mr Bhardwaj said, “It is the prerogative of the collegium to recommend any transfer.”
“They (the collegium) may recommend transfer of more judges, even from the Punjab and Haryana High Court but let me make it clear that the government has no role to play in this regard,” he added.
He said the formal notification regarding the eight Chief Justices transfers would be issued after the Presidential approval on completion of the required formalities at the government level, which included seeking the views of the chief ministers concerned.
He said the ministry had started processing the matter and the entire exercise was expected to be completed in four to six weeks.
Mr Bhardwaj blamed the previous NDA government for leaving nearly 175 posts of High Court judges unfilled and claimed that after the UPA government took over, 55 new judges had been appointed and process for appointing 105 others was almost complete.
The Law Minister outrightly rejected the demand of some senior members of the Bar about a Judicial Commission for the appointment and transfer of judges, saying the government was against ministerial interference in the functioning of the judiciary.
