A day after the Chief Justice of India R.M. Lodha expressed that >separation of powers among the three organs , the judiciary, executive and legislature must be maintained and there should be no encroachment on one’s territory, a public interest writ petition has been filed challenging the National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill providing for appointment of judges to higher judiciary.
In their petition, advocates R. Krishnamurthy and N. Rajaraman also assailed the Constitution Amendment Bill that would confer constitutional status to the proposed NJAC. They argued that the Bills passed in Parliament in the present form violated the independence of judiciary, basic structure and concept of separation of powers.
They submitted that the 2013 Bill was withdrawn and new bills were introduced in haste without any effective consultation with the judiciary and the State governments. The entire manner of legislative initiation was violative of the concept of Federalism in S.R.Bommai’s case and defeated the concept of independence of judiciary, a basic structure of the constitution.
The present collegium procedure including the convention of the senior most Supreme Court judge as the Chief Justice of India had ensured the independence of judiciary. The new procedure through the NJAC purely on the basis of seniority and merit and giving veto power to two members would result in supersession of judges as was done during the emergency period.
The petitioners are also concerned that the rules and regulations regarding the short listing of candidates and the recommendation of candidates had not been provided in the Bill. They sought a declaration that the two Bills were unconstitutional and a direction that the appointment of judges should be done only on the basis of the consultation with the collegiums of judges. This is the second writ petition filed in the apex court, with advocate M.L. Sharma having filed the first one on Thursday.
