Retired judge breaks silence on judge elevation row, says not aware of additional material that could have led to collegium rescinding December decision.
New Delhi: Retired Supreme Court judge Madan B. Lokur Wednesday expressed disappointment that the reasons why the Supreme Court Collegium had rescinded its 12 December decision, of which he was a part, had not been made public.
“I did not question any motive nor did I seek any explanation. It is not my job,” he said breaking his silence on the controversy. “A decision was taken, if it was not put up, I am disappointed.”
Justice Lokur, speaking to senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai at an event organised by a web portal in the national capital, said he wasn’t aware of any additional material, which would have prompted the collegium to rescind its decision elevating Rajasthan High Court Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Delhi High Court Chief Justice Rajendra Menon.
“Nothing was out before me,” he said. “But, I trust that if there’s somebody out there who is looking into this material.” He, however, disagreed with the suggestion whether this material, which was instrumental in rescinding the decision to elevate the judges to the top court, needed to be made public.
Justice Lokur, who retired last month, was dragged into a controversy after the SC collegium rescinded its 12 December decision — elevating Nandrajog and Menon to the apex court — instead recommending on 10 January the elevation of Delhi High Court judge Sanjiv Khanna and the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court Dinesh Maheshwari.
Speaking publicly for the first time since he retired on 30 December, Justice Lokur kept mum on what went on at the contentious collegium meeting despite being prodded incessantly. “What happens at the collegium is done in confidence. I am not going to betray that trust,” he said.
The controversy, however, wasn’t the only aspect of the judiciary addressed by Justice Lokur, who was part of the press conference called by the then senior-most judges in the Supreme Court against the then CJI.
Also read: Sluggish bureaucracy to homophobia, what makes SC Justice Madan B. Lokur very angry
On judicial overreach
When asked whether the top court should be running the BCCI through judgments, the former SC judge said that the apex court had overstepped its jurisdiction.
“I won’t comment on individual cases. But, yes, there are cases where judges have gone beyond their jurisdiction,” he said. The executive overreaches, the legislative overreaches even the judiciary has done so. It is time we take a step back, the former judge added.
On NJAC, MoP and appointment of judges
The former judge, who was part of the October 2016 judgment that declared the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) unconstitutional, which essentially put a top court seal on the collegium system, backed his decision.
He, however, asserted that like all systems, this too needed to be tweaked.
He further agreed that the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) – finalised by the top court in March 2017, is silent on the issue of complaints against the chief justice, adding that there is a “need to bring about a change”.
What do you do when the government sits on a file for months together? Lokur asked referring to the controversy over the elevation of Justice K.M. Joseph. There had to be a mechanism by which timelines need to be strictly adhered to, he said.
There is a possibility, that the government sits on a file because they didn’t want a particular judge, Lokur said.
Also read: Prevent ‘another historical blunder’: Ex-judge to President on names cleared by SC collegium