Eminent jurist urges government to stick with convention of appointing senior-most judge.
New Delhi: Eminent jurist and senior advocate Fali Nariman Friday warned the government against defying convention in appointing the next chief justice of India. “We have had two supersessions so far and both have been disastrous for the country,” he said.
Supersession, if it happens, will be contrary to the convention of appointing the senior-most judge as the chief justice of India.
Nariman was in conversation with ThePrint Chairman and Editor-in-chief Shekhar Gupta on Walk The Talk, a show broadcast on news channel NDTV.
The government has repeatedly sought to play down speculation that Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who is next in line to be appointed as CJI, after incumbent Dipak Misra retires in October, may be superseded. Gogoi was among the four senior-most Supreme Court judges who had held a press conference against the CJI in January this year.
‘Government can’t shift the onus on CJI Misra’
In wake of BJP president Amit Shah stating that the Centre will go with the recommendation of CJI Dipak Misra in appointing his successor, Nariman made it clear that the government cannot shift the onus onto Misra. “The convention is not being bound by the CJI recommendation. The convention is appointing the senior-most judge as CJI,” he said.
With Nariman’s latest book, “God Save the Hon’ble Supreme Court”, set to hit the stands, he also recounted a tumultuous year for the judiciary. Although he reiterated that CJI Misra must reach out to his colleagues and restore collegiality, he blamed the four senior judges for holding the press conference in January this year.
“If you cannot sort the issue internally, then lump it. But the four judges erred in going public against the CJI. But the CJI must bring collegiality as the leader of the constitutional court. How he does this is his job,” he said.
Nariman also criticised the opposition’s move to bring impeachment proceedings against Misra. “In cases like these, you must shoot to kill. Otherwise, you bring the man to disrepute,” he said.
The eminent jurist also supported the court’s recent ruling reiterating that the CJI’s powers as the master of the roster are unqualified. “It is absolutely the business of only the CJI to allot work to other judges. I don’t understand this business of lawyers asking any judge how this case came up before him. In that case, you might as well ask him for his warrant of appointment,” he said.