The collegium member proposed that a higher benchmark should be set for such candidates due to the advantages they have, such as greater resources and experience, compared to first-generation lawyers who have to go through a much tougher journey in the highly competitive legal field.
NEW DELHI: A senior member of the Supreme Court collegium has suggested that the children of sitting or former judges should face stricter criteria for being appointed as High Court judges. This proposal follows an earlier suggestion by a top Supreme Court judge to pause such appointments for a few years.
Many lawyers have long complained that first-generation lawyers are often overlooked when the selection pool for High Court judges includes the children of sitting or former judges, who are often given preference.
According to a report by the Times of India, the senior collegium member argued that while judicial appointments must be based on merit and suitability, it would be unfair to completely exclude such candidates.
“He also felt that it could deprive the constitutional courts of the talent it needs to deal with litigation, which is getting complex with the passage of time.”
The bench, consisting of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, was displeased with this claim and asked, “How many judges can you name whose offspring got the title?”
The bench called the allegations “scurrilous and unfounded” and expressed their serious discontent with the lawyer’s plea against the granting of senior advocate titles to certain lawyers.
However, the Supreme Court judge agreed with the idea behind the initial proposal from another judge, acknowledging the resentment among the legal community.
“He also emphasised that many such selections were deserving cases,” sources told the Times of India.
The collegium member proposed that a higher benchmark should be set for such candidates due to the advantages they have, such as greater resources and experience, compared to first-generation lawyers who have to go through a much tougher journey in the highly competitive legal field.
The grievance of these lawyers was also voiced during a “full court reference” ceremony held on Wednesday to honor three former Supreme Court judges—Justices Kuldip Singh, M Jagannadha Rao, and H S Bedi—who recently passed away.
All three judges had sons who became High Court judges, with one of them resigning within six months of his appointment to return to legal practice in the Supreme Court. In one instance, the father of a deceased Supreme Court judge had also been a judge.
Meanwhile, on Thursday, the Supreme Court strongly criticized a lawyer who made allegations about the relatives of judges being appointed as senior advocates by the courts. The lawyer had insinuated that such appointments were a result of nepotism.
READ ALSO: “Judges Should Be Selected Through Exams Like IAS Officers”: President Droupadi Murmu
Recently, the Supreme Court collegium started holding personal meetings with lawyers and judicial officers recommended for high court positions, moving away from just relying on biodata, written assessments, and intelligence reports. On December 22, the collegium met and recommended around six names to the Centre for high court judgeships in Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Bombay, and Allahabad.
The Supreme Court Collegium in India manages the appointment and transfer of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. This system created through important court rulings, especially in the Second and Third Judges Cases (1993 and 1998), to ensure the judiciary stays independent. The Collegium includes the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the four most senior judges of the Supreme Court. For High Court matters, it includes the CJI and the two most senior judges.
The Collegium suggests names for appointments and transfers, which are sent to the President of India for approval. Although the government can raise concerns or ask for reconsideration, the Collegium’s decision is usually final. While this system is praised for keeping the judiciary independent, it has been criticized for being unclear and not open enough. This has led to discussions about reforms, such as the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), which was later rejected by the Supreme Court in 2015.
The issue of appointing judges’ relatives to High Court positions is complex and often linked to debates about judicial accountability, favoritism, and independence.
Some well-known family traditions in the judiciary
Some well-known families of judges in India include Justice P.N. Bhagwati, who served as the 17th Chief Justice of India and came from a distinguished judicial family. His father, Justice Nageshwar Prasad Bhagwati, was also a judge at the Gujarat High Court.
The recently retired Chief Justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud has a notable background too; his father, Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, was the longest-serving Chief Justice of India. Justice H.R. Khanna also has a family rich in legal tradition, with his son Vivek Khanna becoming a judge of the Delhi High Court.
Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, known for his progressive views, had family members involved in law as well. Many from the Iyer family served as judges and lawyers in the Madras High Court, continuing the family legacy.
Justice Ranganath Misra, the 21st Chief Justice of India and the first chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, had a nephew, Justice Dipak Misra, who also became Chief Justice of India.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
