We use inputs to asses suitability of candidates recommended Govt on judges' appointment

New Delhi, Nov 28 (PTI) The government on Thursday skirted a direct reply to a question on reasons behind keeping in abeyance a decision on two names recommended for appointment as high court judges and said it assessed suitability of candidates based on available inputs and reports.
    Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal was asked in the Rajya Sabha the reasons due to which the names of Ramasamy Neelakandan and John Sathyam had been kept pending despite being recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium in January 2023 for appointment as Madras High Court judges.
    In his written reply, Meghwal said the government "exercises its opinion" on the recommendations made by the Supreme Court Collegium virtue of collaborative process to ensure that the most suitable and meritorious candidate was appointed as a Supreme Court or high court juddge.
    "As per the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), the proposals recommended by the High Court Collegium for appointment as high court judges are to be considered in light of such other reports or inputs as may be available to the government for assessing the suitability in respect of the names under consideration," he said.
    The MoP is a set of documents that guide the appointment, transfer and elevation of high court and Supreme Court judges.
    Meghwal also noted that a Supreme Court judgment in 1993 had observed that merit selection was the dominant method for judicial selections and the candidates to be selected must possess high integrity, honesty, skill, high order of emotional stability, firmness, serenity, legal soundness, ability and endurance.
    Responding to a sub-question, he said there was no provision for reservation for any caste or class of persons in the higher judiciary -- the Supreme Court and high courts.
    Therefore, category-wise data pertaining to representation of Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) among the judges of high courts are not centrally maintained. However, since 2018, the candidates for the post of high court judges are required to provide details regarding their social background in the prescribed format, which was prepared in consultation with the Supreme Court.
    Based on the information provided by the recommendees, out of 684 high courts judges appointed since 2018, 21 belong to the SC category, 14 ST category, 82 OBC category, and 37 belong to the minorities.
    "As on October 31, 2024, two women judges are working in the Supreme Court and 106 in various high courts," the minister told the House.

(This story has not been edited by THE WEEK and is auto-generated from PTI)