“Chief Justice of a High Court cannot individually reconsider a recommendation,” SC Directs HP HC Collegium to reconsider the names of District Judges for elevation as HC judges

Today (September 06, 2024), the Supreme Court (SC) of India was hearing a writ petition filed by two senior district judges from Himachal Pradesh (HP) contending that the HP High Court (HC) Collegium ignored their seniority and long-standing unblemished service while recommending names for elevation to the HC. The bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra allowed the writ petition and directed the HP HC Collegium to reconsider the names of District Judges Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra for elevation as judges of the HC, following the SC Collegium decision dated January 04, 2024, and the Law Minister’s letter dated January 16, 2024. During the proceedings, the bench observed, “...the procedure adopted in the matter of reconsideration of the two petitioners is found to be inconsistent with the law laid down in the Second Judges and the Third Judges case.” It added, “There was no collective consultation and deliberations by the members of the High Court Collegium. The decision of the Chief Justice of the High Court, on the suitability of the two petitioners…appears to be an individual decision. The same therefore stand vitiated both procedurally and substantially.” 

In this case, the petitioners (Chirag Bhanu Singh and Arvind Malhotra) were recommended by the then HC Collegium on December 06, 2022, for elevation as judges of the HP HC. On July 12, 2023, the Supreme Court Collegium, however, deferred their consideration. Thereafter, on January 04, 2024, the SC Collegium in its wisdom resolved that the proposal for the elevation of both be remitted for reconsideration to the Chief Justice of the HP HC. In the letter dated January 16, 2024, addressed by the Minister for Law and Justice to the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh, in reference to the Supreme Court Collegium Resolution dated January 04, 2024, a request was made that fresh recommendations be sent to the two officers against the available service quota vacancies in the Himachal Pradesh High Court. The grievance of the writ petitioners is that the HC Collegium without first reconsidering the two petitioners recommended two other judicial officers for elevation. The argument is that if the latter recommended persons are considered for appointment ahead of the two petitioners, it would amount to ignoring their seniority and long-standing unblemished service. On May 13, 2024, adverting to the contentions raised, the apex Court issued notice only to the Registrar General of the HP HC seeking a report detailing whether the HC Collegium reconsidered the names of the petitioners following the SC's resolution. The report was submitted on July 15 whereas after hearing the submission on August 06, the bench reserved its judgment. Today, after hearing the matter, the SC bench said, 

• “The writ petition is maintainable as it questions the lack of effective consultation;
• The Chief Justice of a High Court cannot individually reconsider a recommendation and it can only be done by the High Court Collegium acting collectively.” 

Therefore, it ordered to reconsider petitioners' names for elevation as Himachal Pradesh High Court judges.