Very unhappy: SC on Centre's cherry-picking tribunals' appointments
IANS 15 September 2021
The Supreme Court on Wednesday criticised the government for "cherry picking" from its recommendations for tribunals across the country, and asked, what is sanctity of recommendations by the panel headed by sitting top court judges if the government has the last say on the matter?
The top court told Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal, representing the Centre, that it is "very unhappy" with the way Centre has made appointments to the tribunals.
The bench emphasized that it is distressing that names recommended by selection panel, which comprised of sitting top court judges and two senior bureaucrats, were not treated seriously.
The top court gave Centre two weeks, as the last opportunity, to make good the appointments and furnish reasons for names, which were rejected. "Make all appointments. We give you two weeks' time," said the bench.
The top court expressed its unhappiness to Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal, representing the Centre, with the way the central government has made appointments to the tribunals.
A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana, and comprising justices DY Chandrachud and L Nageswara Rao, told the AG it did not appreciate Centre's "cherry-picking" names for appointment after recommendations made by the Search-cum- Selection Committees (SCSC) headed by Supreme Court judges.
"We are very unhappy with what is going on," noted the chief justice, while questioning the Centre as to why recommendations made by SCSC were not accepted. The SCSC shortlists candidates for appointment and then sends it to the Centre for clearance.
The bench pointed out that the SCSC recommended nine judicial members and 10 technical members for National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the appointment letter issued showed "as if members were cherry picked and some were kept on waiting".
It said, "We cannot ignore selected candidates and go to waitlist. What type of selection and appointment is this?"
The AG contended before the bench that the government has power not to accept the recommendation.
The chief justice responded that in a democracy one cannot say recommendations cannot be accepted, and added: "What is the sanctity of recommendations made by panel headed by sitting top court judges, if the government has the last say on the matter?"
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
India, Singapore To Link UPI and PayNow by July 2022
Moneylife Digital Team 14 September 2021
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) decided to link their respective fast payment systems unified payments interface (UPI) and PayNow. The linkage is targeted for operationalisation by July...
RBI warns against frauds in guise of KYC update
IANS 14 September 2021
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has cautioned the public against falling prey to frauds in the name of KYC (know your customer) update and sharing key details such as debit and credit card details and OTPs.
In a statement...
Data Displays Descent, Decay and Decline of Banking Sector over Past 3 Decades
Ranganathan V, 13 September 2021
The story of its ruin is simple and obvious, and instead of inquiring why the Roman empire was destroyed, we should rather be surprised that it had subsisted so long. The victorious legions, who, in distant wars, acquired the vices...
Adhere to the 330 Days Deadline for Completing CIRP under IBC; Supreme Court Tells NCLT, NCLAT
Moneylife Digital Team 13 September 2021
While maintaining that the resolution applicant cannot modify or withdraw its resolution plan approved by the committee of creditors (CoC) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), the Supreme Court has asked National Company...
Free Helpline
Legal Credit