Today, On 5th August, The Central government approved a new one-year term for nine additional judges of the Calcutta High Court. In July, the Supreme Court Collegium decided to extend their terms by a year instead of making them permanent judges. This move allows for continued assessment of their performance.
New Delhi: The Central Government , On Monday, approved a new one-year term for nine additional judges of the Calcutta High Court.
The judges receiving the extension are Justices Biswaroop Chowdhury, Partha Sarathi Sen, Prasenjit Biswas, Uday Kumar, Ajay Kumar Gupta, Supratim Bhattacharya, Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, Apurba Sinha Ray, and Md Shabbar Rashidi.
Their extended terms will commence on August 31, 2024.
In July, the Supreme Court Collegium decided to grant these nine judges a fresh one-year term instead of appointing them as permanent judges.
This decision came despite the Calcutta High Court Collegium‘s unanimous recommendation on April 29 to make these judges permanent, a recommendation that was supported by the Central Government.
The Chief Minister and the Governor of West Bengal did not provide their views on the High Court Collegium‘s recommendation. Consequently, the Supreme Court Collegium sought input from judges familiar with the workings of the Calcutta High Court before making its decision.
After thorough consultation, the Collegium chose to extend the judges’ terms as additional judges for another year rather than granting them permanent status.
This recommendation from the Supreme Court Collegium has now been formally approved by the Central Government, ensuring that the nine judges will continue to serve for an additional year.
The decision highlights the complex process of judicial appointments and extensions in India, involving multiple layers of recommendations and approvals. It highlights the roles of the High Court Collegium, the Supreme Court Collegium, and the Central Government, as well as the importance of inputs from state-level authorities.
The extension aims to provide continuity in the judicial system while further evaluations are conducted regarding the permanent appointments of these judges.
Read Attachment
