The Allahabad High Court revealed that UP police often pressure judges, especially CJMs, to deliver specific rulings. The Court warned, “Dekhiye isko na police State nai banane dena (We can’t allow this).”
The Delhi High Court criticized the Delhi Government and DDA for delays in providing residential accommodations to district judges, warning of potential action if the situation persists. The court expressed frustration over repeated requests being ignored, emphasizing the urgent need for decent living conditions for judicial officers and demanding timely action from authorities.
The All India Judicial Service (AIJS) proposal faces stagnation on November 29 due to disagreement among key stakeholders, according to Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal. Despite prior discussions and a 2012 framework approval, the lack of consensus persists, exacerbated by numerous vacancies across the judiciary and rising criminal case pendency nationwide.
Former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud called for urgent government action to fill 21% of vacant district court positions, emphasizing the need for increased judicial investment. He proposed an “All India Judicial Service Examination” to address staffing shortages and urged for better infrastructure to ensure timely justice and effective governance, particularly for the underprivileged.
Today, On 6th September, the Supreme Court ruled that limited judicial scrutiny of Collegium decisions is permitted to ensure proper consultation among members. The decision allows review of consultation process but not the suitability of candidates. The Court emphasized collective decision-making in judicial appointments and directed a reconsideration of two District Judges’ candidacies for elevation.
![[BREAKING] "HC Chief Justice Made an Error by Making a Unilateral decision": SC Grants Relief to Two District Judges Superseded by HP HC Collegium](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-2024-09-06T111611.677.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Supreme Court today granted relief to two Himachal Pradesh district judges, directing the High Court collegium to reconsider their promotion, citing disregarded merit and seniority. The Court criticized the unilateral decision-making process and instructed the collegium to adhere to established legal standards. This decision aligns with previous resolutions and requests from the Supreme Court collegium and the Law Minister.
The Supreme Court today urged the Centre to address the meager pensions for district judges, citing concerns for their welfare. The Attorney General and Solicitor General were requested to collaborate with the amicus curiae to find a solution. The bench postponed the hearing to address pension-related concerns and highlighted the delay in implementing uniform service conditions for judicial officers.
Today(on 17th May), The Supreme Court has upheld the promotion policy of the Gujarat High Court for the District Judge cadre under the 65% quota, based on merit-cum-seniority. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra lifted the stay on promoting 68 judicial officers to district judges.
The Supreme Court, led by CJI Chandrachud, upheld Gujarat High Court’s district judges’ promotion policy. Using aircraft internet on his return from a Brazil summit, CJI collaborated with Justices Pardiwala and Misra. The judgment involved a plea contesting Gujarat government’s appointment decisions and challenged merit-cum-seniority rule for promotions. The Court commended the efforts of junior lawyer Mayur Raghuvanshi.