*Guv returns file twice, questions stand taken by judiciary
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Mar 22: Jammu and Kashmir High Court and Raj Bhawan are at loggerheads over appointment of District and Sessions Judges with Governor N N Vohra returning the file to the Law Department twice questioning the stand taken by the judiciary.
Reliable sources told EXCELSIOR that last year State High Court initiated the process for filling up of vacant posts of District and Sessions Judges under promotion quota and accordingly written test of all the applicants (in-service Sub Judges/Chief Judicial Magistrates) was conducted.
Thereafter 24 candidates were shortlisted for the interview and on the basis of merit and suitability besides all other relevant aspects eight in-service Sub Judges/CJMs were chosen for appointment as District and Sessions Judges under promotion quota.
The names of these eight candidates were placed before the Full Court, which found it appropriate to immediately recommend seven names to the Governor through Law Department for approval and issuance of appointment orders. However, in respect of 8th name it was decided to wait till outcome of the enquiry which was initiated against this one particular candidate.
In this way two separate recommendations were made by the High Court to the Governor through the Law Department for appointment as District and Sessions Judges. However, reason behind making recommendation of one person separately was not recorded in the file by the High Court, sources informed.
After going through the file the Governor N N Vohra sought to know the reasons behind making two separate recommendations and also desired that the resolution of the Full Court in this regard should be placed before him so as to enable him to take decision. Accordingly, the file was sent back to the Law Department, which forwarded the same to the High Court for responding to the observations recorded by the Governor.
“Though the High Court recorded the reason behind making two separate recommendations but it preferred not to give the copy of the Full Court resolution. Moreover, the High Court explicitly mentioned that recommendations of Full Court were binding upon the Government as such there was no ground behind seeking copy of the same”, sources further informed.
According to the sources, the Governor expressed shock over the stance of the High Court vis-à-vis furnishing copy of the Full Court resolution. “The binding of the Government to act on the resolution of the Full Court doesn’t mean that signatures are to be put blindly”, sources said quoting the observations of the Raj Bhawan.
Questioning the rationale behind not furnishing the copy of the Full Court resolution, the Governor is of the opinion that this stand of the High Court amounts to creating hurdles in ensuring transparency in its functioning. Now, the Governor has again sent back the file to the Law Department by recording concerns on this vital aspect.
They further said, “though the Law Department has again conveyed the concerns of the Governor to the High Court yet the latter has not taken any decision till date as a result of which the appointment of eight in-service Sub-Judges/CJMs to the posts of District and Sessions Judges is hanging in balance”.
“At a time when enough thrust is being laid on transparency there was no justification behind not furnishing copy of the Full Court resolution to the Governor”, sources in Law Department said, adding “had this been done the appointments could have been made till date”. Moreover, these appointments are must so as to facilitate quick disposal of the cases pending in the courts.
In the interest of dispensing justice to the litigants, the High Court should make available all the record to the Governor so that vacant posts of District and Sessions Judges under promotion quota are filled up without wastage of more time, sources stressed.
Follow our WhatsApp channel