'Won't Open Pandora's Box': SC on Himachal Judge Challenging Collegium Recommendations, Says 'Seniority Doesn’t Guarantee Elevation'

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a petition filed by Arvind Malhotra, Principal Judge of a Family Court in Dharamshala, who challenged the Supreme Court Collegium's recommendation of three judicial officers for elevation to the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Malhotra had argued that officers junior to him were recommended for elevation while his name did not figure in the recommendations.

Further, refusing to examine the internal deliberations of the Collegium, the Court said doing so would create an undesirable precedent.

"We will not open a Pandora's box by enquiring into the decisions of the High Court and Supreme Court collegiums," the bench observed.

The Court added that there was nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner's candidature had been rejected by the High Court Collegium.

'Mere Seniority Does Not Guarantee Elevation': SC

Hearing the matter, a bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made it clear that seniority alone cannot be the basis for elevation to a High Court.

"Merely because you are a senior does not mean you will be recommended. Once the collegium discusses, we cannot intervene. There is secrecy involved also," the Bench observed.

The Court noted that appointments and elevations to constitutional courts are based on the subjective assessment of the Collegium and are not governed solely by seniority.

During the hearing, the bench was also informed that Malhotra still has around ten years of service remaining.

Responding to this, Justice Joymalya Bagchi remarked, "Then you have time. Please wait."

Justice Nagarathna echoed the sentiment, telling the petitioner, "Please have some patience."

The Court noted that if consideration of his name had merely been deferred, future vacancies in the High Court could still provide an opportunity for elevation.

Supreme Court Draws Line on Collegium Decisions

The bench firmly stated that it could not sit in judgement over the Collegium's decision-making process or direct reconsideration of recommendations.

"Can the Supreme Court on the judicial side ask them (the collegium) to look into this and look into that? If this happens, then where are we heading?" the court remarked.

The judges further stressed that there was nothing on record to indicate that Malhotra's candidature had been formally rejected.

On June 3, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended the names of judicial officers Chirag Bhanu Singh, Bhupesh Sharma and Yogesh Jaswal for appointment as judges of the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Malhotra's petition challenged those recommendations, contending that he had been called for interaction and asked to submit documents, but was ultimately bypassed in favour of officers junior to him.

However, the Supreme Court held that there was no evidence showing his candidature had been rejected and declined to interfere with the Collegium's recommendations.

ALSO READ: IEDs, K9s & A Lost Leg: The Untold Story Of A CoBRA Officer On Life-Altering Anti-Naxal Operation