7 lawyers make it as additional HC judges

After a long delay, the Centre on Friday cleared the names of seven lawyers as additional judges of the Madras High Court.

On December 19, 2016, then Chief Justice of Madras High Court Sanjay Kishan Kaul (now a Supreme Court judge) recommended elevation of 11 lawyers as judges of the court. The Supreme Court cleared nine of the 11 names on December 4, 2017. And around six months thereafter, the Centre, issued a notification appointing seven of the nine lawyers as additional judges of the court for a period of two years.

The notification issued by the Union Ministry of Law and Justice stated that the President had consented to appoint P.T. Asha, M. Nirmal Kumar, Subramonium Prasad, N. Anand Venkatesh, G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, Krishnan Ramasamy and C. Saravanan as additional judges of the High Court for a period of two years from the date they assume charge. Court officials said Chief Justice Indira Banerjee would administer the oath of office on Wednesday.

Names of advocates A.V. Radhakrishnan and Additional Public Prosecutor C. Emalias had actually found a place at the top of the list in the recommendation made by Mr. Justice Kaul in December 2016. It also contained the name of Additional Advocate General B. Pugalendhi, after Mr. Prasad’s name, followed by Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy. The then Governor as well as Chief Minister had also concurred with the proposal for elevation of the recommendees.

However, the Supreme Court collegium comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices J. Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi found Mr. Radhakrishnan unsuitable for elevation, since he had crossed the maximum age limit of 55 years even on the date of recommendation. In so far as Mr. Pugalendhi was concerned, a decision on the proposal for his elevation was deferred for want of verification of certain “unconfirmed inputs” received by the collegium.

Though Mr. Emalias had also crossed 55 years of age when the Supreme Court collegium took up the proposal for consideration in December 2017, it cleared his name because he was below the maximum age limit when his name was recommended in December 2016. However, the Centre has now dropped his name from the list without assigning any reason. It did not clear the name of Mr. Ramamoorthy too despite the apex court finding him suitable for elevation.

Seniority lost

On April 19, the collegium cleared the name of Mr. Pugalendhi too after verification of the “unconfirmed inputs” received against him and after holding a personal interaction with him in New Delhi. However, in the process, the lawyer lost his original seniority as per the recommendation made in December 2016. Therefore, his name did not figure in the notification issued by the Centre on Wednesday.

Court sources pointed out that long delays in appointment of judges were not confined only to those elevated from the Bar. It continued to be a common phenomenon even with respect to elevations from the district judiciary. They said Mr. Justice Kaul had on January 23, 2017 recommended names of six judicial officers for being elevated as High Court judges and the first in the list was B. Sarodjiny Devi, Principal District Judge, Villupuram.

However, the collegium on October 3, 2017 decided to keep her name on hold on the ground that an inquiry against her was pending before the High Court and called for details from the latter. However, Chief Justice Indira Banerjee on November 13, 2017 submitted a report to the effect that no departmental enquiry was initiated against the judicial officer and that no enquiry, either discreet or otherwise, was pending against her.

After taking note of the report, the collegium cleared her name on April 19 this year but in the process she too lost her seniority, because in the meantime many of her juniors got elevated, and the Centre was yet to issue a notification appointing her as a judge of the High Court.