The Supreme Court remarked that a transferred Judge does not carry the label of a Bar or a Service Judge and it is up to the Chief Justice where he is transferred to reduce the inflow in the Court of transfer, i.e., from the Bar or Service.
“The transferred Judge does not carry the label of a Bar or a Service Judge and it is up to the Chief Justice where he is transferred to reduce the inflow in the Court of transfer, i.e., from the Bar or Service. Similarly if from the Court where Judges are transferred, in turn, Judges from either category are transferred to other Courts they in turn will carry the label of a transferred Judge and not from the Bar or the Service,” a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka said.
The court also said that this aspect has been clarified as there appear to be some doubts expressed about how the system of transfer will operate.
“We may say when recommendations for transfer are not implemented, the further recommendations consequent thereto or otherwise for transfer also get delayed,” the court said as it listed the matter for further hearing on February 3 2023.
The court so appreciated the fact that in every High Court, there is a sanctioned strength of Judges, 2/3rd of the Judges are from the Bar and 1/3rd from the Service.
“If a Judge is transferred from a Court, it is not as if a replacement can be provided from the Bar or the Service Judges of that Court as the total strength of the Court is specified. When the Judge is transferred to another Court, he is a transferred Judge neither categorized from the Bar nor from the Service,” the court said.
“In the Court where he is transferred he occupies a physical position in the strength of that Court and unless correspondingly Judges are transferred from that Court, there will be a lesser person appointed in that Court from the Bar/Services as the total strength of the Court to which transfer is made cannot be exceeded,” the court said.
The court was dealing with the Collegium recommendations made for transferring 10 High Court Judges. Two of them were sent by the end of September 2022 and 8 were sent by the end of November 2022.
The transfer of High Court Judges is done in the interest of the administration of justice and exception apart there is no reason for any delay on the part of the Government in implementing the same. The Collegium discusses and seeks the opinion of consultee Judges as also the Chief Justices from where a transfer is being made and where to transfer is being made, the court noted.
“Comments of the Judges concerned are also obtained. At times at the request of the Judge concerned, an alternative Court is also assigned for transfer looking to the exigency of the situation. This process is completed before a recommendation is made for the transfer of Judge to the Government,” the court said.
“Delay in the same not only affects the administration of justice but creates an impression as if there are third party sources interfering on behalf of these Judges with the Government,” the court said.
Insofar as the recommendations of four Chief Justices and the transfer of one Chief Justice are concerned, Attorney Gen assured the Court that he is looking into it personally.
“We have impressed upon the learned AG that there will be vacancies for Chief Justices which will arise on account of elevations to the Supreme Court and those cannot be processed till the elevation takes place which is a matter of concern,” the court said.
Attorney General R. Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre, on Friday assured the court the Government will adhere to the timelines as provided in the judgment.
On Friday, he also submitted out of the 104 recommendations made by the Collegiums of the High Courts pending with the Government, 44s are likely to be processed and sent to the Supreme Court by the weekend.
The court heard a plea against the Centre for keeping the Collegium recommended names of judges for their appointment in the various High courts and Supreme Court pending. (ANI)
