New Delhi: Two advocates were on Tuesday appointed as additional judges of the Bombay High Court.
Law Minister Kiren Rijiju tweeted about the appointment of Santosh Govindrao Chapalgaonkar and Milind Manohar Sathaye.
Additional judges are usually appointed for two years before being elevated to permanent judges. As on November 1, the Bombay high court had a vacancy of 28 judges.
The appointment order comes after the Central Government asked the Supreme Court Collegium to reconsider 20 files related to the appointment of high court judges.
Advocate’s sexual identity against his promotion
Out of the 20 cases, 11 were fresh cases and nine were reiterations made by the top court collegium. According to sources, the Centre had expressed “strong reservations” about the recommended names, including that of senior advocate Saurabh Kirpal who has candidly spoken about his gay status. It sent back the files on November 25.
Kirpal is the son of former CJI B N Kirpal. He had fought for the decriminalization of Section 377 in 2018 when the Supreme Court gave the landmark judgement of legalising homosexuality.
It is to be noted that last year, the Supreme Court Collegium, headed by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) N V Ramana, had recommended Kirpal for elevation as a Delhi High Court judge. This would make him the country’s first openly gay judge.
However, the file has been pending with the Central Government and there has been no movement since.
In an interview with NDTV on November 17, Kirpal said, “The reason is my sexuality. I don’t think the government necessarily wants to appoint an openly gay person to the bench.”
Irritated Supreme Court questions Centre’s delay
On November 28, the apex court expressed anguish over the Centre’s delay in clearing the names recommended by the collegium for appointment of judges in the Supreme Court as well as High Courts.
A bench consisting of Justices S K Kaul and A S Oka was hearing a plea filed by the Advocates Association, Bengaluru over the Centre’s failure reminded Attorney General R Venkataramani, who was representing the Central Government, that it has been one-and-a-half years the Union government is sitting on the recommendations.
“Mr. Attorney General, the ground reality is…names are not being cleared. How will the system work? Some names are pending for the last one and half years. You are frustrating the method of appointment, we only issued notice to find out the problem,” the bench said, adding the delay has affected the seniority of the judges.
Justice Kaul observed it appears the government is unhappy with the fact that the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act did not pass muster, but that cannot be a reason not to comply with the law of the land.
The apex court had in its 2015 verdict striking down the NJAC Act and the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014, leading to the revival of the Collegium system of existing judges appointing judges to constitutional courts.
The matter was adjourned for hearing on December 8 after the Attorney General and Solicitor General assured the court that they will look into the matter.
(With PTI inputs)
