Maithani could supersede some senior judicial officers. Centre had rejected Uttarakhand HC chief justice K.M. Joseph’s elevation to SC on the same grounds.
New Delhi: Three months ago, the Centre cited lack of seniority and regional representation to reject the Supreme Court collegium’s recommendation to elevate Uttarakhand High Court chief justice K.M. Joseph to the Supreme Court. Now, the high court is learnt to have recommended the name of SC secretary-general Ravindra Maithani for appointment as one of its judges. If the appointment goes through, Maithani will supersede some judicial officers senior to him.
Sources told ThePrint that the high court collegium recommended two other names along with Maithani’s for elevation last month – Ramesh Chandra Khulbe and N.D. Dhanik.
Who is Maithani?
Maithani is a district and sessions judge rank officer of the Uttarakhand subordinate judiciary, and one of the longest-serving secretaries general of the apex court. His close proximity to Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra has been a matter of intense speculation in judicial circles.
Although every CJI has his preference for the post of the secretary-general, Maithani has served under seven successive CJIs, except T.S. Thakur. In 2016, Thakur replaced Maithani with V.S.R. Avadhani, a judicial officer from Andhra Pradesh. However, Thakur’s successor J.S. Khehar brought Maithani back soon after he became CJI.
The seven officers at the Supreme Court registry — six registrars and the secretary-general — are judicial officers of the rank of district judge. They are mostly on deputation to the apex court, and after their term, return to their home cadres.
In some instances, they are appointed judges of high courts. A.I.S. Cheema, who headed the registry before Maithani, was appointed a judge of the Bombay High Court. After retirement, he was appointed a member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.
How will Centre react?
Maithani’s nomination raises questions, not only because of his proximity to Misra, but also his lack of seniority. If his elevation comes through, it will be interesting to see what view the Centre takes, considering its objections to Justice K.M. Joseph’s elevation.
The Centre returned his name to the collegium for reconsideration, even while it accepted the simultaneous proposal to elevate senior advocate Indu Malhotra. The reluctance to elevate Justice Joseph became apparent when it kept his nomination in abeyance for more than three months.
Experts have suggested that Joseph’s judgment, where he quashed President’s Rule in Uttarakhand allowing the revival of Harish Rawat’s Congress government, cost him the seat in the apex court.
However, according to the Centre, Joseph’s nomination was stalled owing to his lack of seniority. In a letter to CJI Misra, union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad reasoned Joseph was “only No. 42 in the all India seniority list” and that “there are 11 chief justices senior to him”.
The Centre’s decision to return Joseph’s file to the collegium has invoked sharp criticism and provoked a political slug fest in and out of the apex court corridors. While the Congress has accused the BJP-led government of interfering with the judicial process, the bar is of the opinion that the state is cherry-picking judges.
Why this writer addressed C. J. I. as Mishra and Joseph as Justice Joseph