vajiraoias

Why in News? The Punjab Cabinet objected to the appointment of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra as Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, raising an important constitutional question: Does the State Government have the power to approve or reject the appointment of a High Court Chief Justice? The answer is NO. The State Government has a consultative role, but it does not have the power to appoint or veto the appointment. Under Article 217 of the Constitution, a High Court judge is appointed by the President after consultation with: * Chief Justice of India (CJI) * Governor of the concerned State * Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, in cases of judges other than the Chief Justice How does the State Government enter the process? Under Article 163, the Governor ordinarily acts on the aid and advice of the State Council of Ministers. Therefore, the State Government's views can form part of the Governor's consultation with the President. However, State Government consent is NOT mandatory because Article 217 uses the word "consultation", not "consent" or "approval". State Government → Consultation → No Veto Power EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS 1. First Judges Case – 1981 S.P. Gupta v. Union of India The Supreme Court held that "consultation" does not mean "concurrence", giving greater influence to the Executive. 2. Second Judges Case – 1993 Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India The judgment established the Collegium system and gave primacy to the judiciary in judicial appointments. 3. Third Judges Case – 1998 Re: Special Reference No. 1 of 1998 The Supreme Court further clarified the Collegium system. For Supreme Court appointments: CJI + 4 senior-most Supreme Court judges For High Court appointments: CJI + 2 senior-most Supreme Court judges NJAC AND THE COLLEGIUM SYSTEM In 2014, Parliament enacted the 99th Constitutional Amendment and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. The proposed NJAC consisted of: * Chief Justice of India * Two senior-most Supreme Court judges * Union Law Minister * Two eminent persons In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment and NJAC Act by a 4:1 majority in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India. The Court held that judicial independence is part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution and that increased executive involvement could compromise judicial independence. The Collegium system was therefore restored. PRESENT SYSTEM Collegium – Primacy in recommending judicial appointments CJI – Leads the Supreme Court Collegium President – Formally appoints High Court judges Governor – Constitutional consultation channel State Government – Provides views through the Governor Union Executive – Processes appointments and advises the President State Government – No veto power KEY CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE The present system attempts to balance judicial independence with executive and State consultation. For UPSC aspirants, this topic is important for Indian Polity, Constitution, Judiciary, Separation of Powers, Basic Structure Doctrine and Current Affairs. Important Articles: Article 217 – Appointment and conditions of office of a High Court Judge Article 163 – Council of Ministers to aid and advise the Governor Important Cases: * S.P. Gupta v. Union of India – First Judges Case * Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India – Second Judges Case * Re: Special Reference No. 1 of 1998 – Third Judges Case * Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India – NJAC Case, 2015 Follow Vajirao & Reddy Institute for UPSC Current Affairs, Indian Polity, Constitution, MCQs and exam-oriented content. #UPSC #UPSCPolity #IndianPolity #Judiciary #HighCourt #VajiraoAndReddy #UPSCPreparation #UPSC2027 #IASPreparation #ConstitutionOfIndia