The Wire Staff 
New Delhi: The Supreme Court collegium has received 70 pending names for appointments since November 2022 and is currently processing them, with the goal of completing the process before the October vacation.
According to LiveLaw, the high court Chief Justice’s recommendation, 14 out of 26 transfer proposals, and five out of 19 names for appointment have been cleared.
“The positive development is that a large number of recommendations from high courts pending with the [Union] Ministry [of Law and Justice] have finally been forwarded to the collegium. It would not be correct to say that they are pending with the collegium, as they have been received just on the anvil of the last hearing, or in the last two days,” said the top court.
The court made these comments while hearing a petition filed by the Advocates Association of Bengaluru, seeking contempt action against the Union Ministry of Law and Justice for not adhering to the timeline set by the court in a 2021 judgment for clearing collegium proposals.
In April 2021, the top court held that the Union government is obligated to revert to the collegium within 18 weeks if it has any reservation to a name proposed for judgeship.
However, the apex court has repeatedly raised concerns about the Union government’s delays in deciding on numerous collegium recommendations for high court judges’ appointments and transfers.
During the hearing, senior advocate Arvind Datar and advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, expressed their concerns over the government’s delay in notifying appointments, and the inconsistent handling of the names recommended or reiterated by the collegium.
It said that some names recommended by the collegium remain in limbo, sometimes for months, while some others forwarded by the collegium are relatively cleared quickly, without delay.
According to the Hindu, Justice Kaul responded to these remarks saying, “In this process of back and forth, it may not be advisable that all appointment processes are kept at bay for the time being… Sometimes, we make mistakes, we recall [names]. we are not infallible.”
The senior advocates also suggested that names reiterated by the Supreme Court collegium be considered deemed appointments, the report added.
However, Justice Kaul, responding to the suggestion made, said, “How does a deemed appointment work? There are practical complications. Also, the attorney-general won’t be able to persuade the government to that effect.”
But he acknowledged that the collegium should not be in limbo, and that “there should not be too much pick-and-choose” by the government while clearing names for appointments.
The case will be next heard on October 20.