The Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani is under orders of transfer to the Meghalaya High Court. The former has 75 judges and the latter 3 judges. Therefore there is no doubt that this is a punitive transfer. She is the senior-most High Court judge now and in the normal course would have been elevated to the Supreme Court in the near future.
According to NDTV, she is transferred on the basis of feedback from the Madras High Court. This is as enigmatic as anything can be. The transfer recommendation has been made by the Supreme Court collegium. Foreclosing one's opportunity to become a judge of the apex court is not a trifling matter. The collegium must have thought twice before making this portentous recommendation. The proposal is mysterious because Tahilramani has generally been considered non-controversial.
Tahilramani is likely to resign as she feels victimised. It is incumbent on the collegium to clear the air surrounding this mystery. It has made its recommendation "in the interest of better administration of justice." It has also rejected her plea for reconsideration. So, it strongly feels that Tahilramani's continued presence in the Madras High Court is not desirable.
Did the collegium come under governmental pressure? If it acted under pressure, the quintet forming the collegium at present do not deserve to be judges. Thus it is in their own interest that the collegium owes a clarification to the nation which is anxious that judiciary must not wilt under any kind of pressure.
There is onus on the part of the government also to explain what has happened. It cannot wash its hands off on the plea that it only acted on the collegium recommendation. The Law Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad needs to remember that he had often claimed that the government is not just a post office conveying the collegium's recommendation to the President and that it duly applies its mind. Did it occur to the Law Minister that there is something sinister about the collegium proposal? Or is he the author of the proposal? Both the collegium and the government will do well to come clean on this apparently mischievous move. If the honourable judge had invited this action through her below-par performance, she must not be allowed to play the victim card. Whichever way you look at this sordid development, there is a crying need for clarification.
According to NDTV, she is transferred on the basis of feedback from the Madras High Court. This is as enigmatic as anything can be. The transfer recommendation has been made by the Supreme Court collegium. Foreclosing one's opportunity to become a judge of the apex court is not a trifling matter. The collegium must have thought twice before making this portentous recommendation. The proposal is mysterious because Tahilramani has generally been considered non-controversial.
Tahilramani is likely to resign as she feels victimised. It is incumbent on the collegium to clear the air surrounding this mystery. It has made its recommendation "in the interest of better administration of justice." It has also rejected her plea for reconsideration. So, it strongly feels that Tahilramani's continued presence in the Madras High Court is not desirable.
Did the collegium come under governmental pressure? If it acted under pressure, the quintet forming the collegium at present do not deserve to be judges. Thus it is in their own interest that the collegium owes a clarification to the nation which is anxious that judiciary must not wilt under any kind of pressure.
There is onus on the part of the government also to explain what has happened. It cannot wash its hands off on the plea that it only acted on the collegium recommendation. The Law Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad needs to remember that he had often claimed that the government is not just a post office conveying the collegium's recommendation to the President and that it duly applies its mind. Did it occur to the Law Minister that there is something sinister about the collegium proposal? Or is he the author of the proposal? Both the collegium and the government will do well to come clean on this apparently mischievous move. If the honourable judge had invited this action through her below-par performance, she must not be allowed to play the victim card. Whichever way you look at this sordid development, there is a crying need for clarification.
No comments:
Post a Comment