Judicial activism cannot encroach on other limbs of democracy. It is itself counter-productive to the doctrine of separation of powers among the executive, legislature and the judiciary, the Madras High Court orally said on Friday.
The observation was made when a writ petition seeking a direction to restrain the Centre from forwarding a list of nine names recommended to fill the vacancies of Judges of the Madras High Court till the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act is notified came up.
At present, there are 18 vacancies in the High Court. The sanctioned strength is 60.
The petitioner, S.Kasiramalingam, an advocate, submitted that the Madras High Court Chief Justice had shortlisted nine names for appointment of judges. Parliament had passed the National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill after making necessary amendments to the Constitution, to which the President had given his assent last December.
When the President had given his assent, the Collegium of the Supreme Court could not usurp the power of Parliament, because separation of powers among the executive, legislature and the judiciary was the basic feature of the Constitution.
The petitioner submitted before a Division Bench comprising Justices V.Ramasubramanian and P.R.Shivakumar that following the Presidential assent, the Centre had lost its constitutional right to forward the list of nine names to the President.
Mr.Justice Ramasubramanian cited an earlier Supreme Court case in an identical situation where the court had said a Writ of Mandamus could not be issued.
Counsel said that courts could go into any act by the executive which was against the Constitution. The court could step in through judicial activism.
To this, Mr.Justice Shivakumar said through judicial activism courts could not encroach on the other limbs of democracy.
The Judge said that the collegium system was introduced through judicial activism. Now, you want to undo that system through judicial activism, he said smilingly. At the request of the petitioner, the matter was later adjourned.
HC says judicial activism cannot encroach on other limbs of democracy
