214th Report - Law Commission of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan ILI Building (IInd Floor),(Former Judge, Supreme Court of India) Bhagwandas Road,Chairman, Law Commission of India New Delhi-110 001Tel.: 91-11-23384475Fax: 91-23383564Respected Shri Bhardwajji,21.11.208I am herewith enclosing our 214 th Report on “Proposal for Reconsideration ofJudges cases I, I and III – S.P. Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 SC 149,Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association Vs UOI reported in 1993(4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SC 739”.The proposal was placed before the Members of the Commission at 3.30 p.m.today. The Members of the Commission after due discussion anddeliberations have unanimously approved the report of the Commission. TheCommission, as already stated, examined the law on the subject. Variousrecommendations of Parliamentary Standing Committees and law of foreignjurisdiction like America, Australia, Canada and Kenya, where the executiveis the sole authority to appoint Judges or the executive appoints inconsultation with the Chief Justice of the Country have also been considered.I request you to consider this report and do the needful at the earliest.Since the matter is of great importance, I am submitting this reporttoday itself.Yours sincerely,Shri H.R. Bhardwaj,Hon’ble Minister for Law & Justice,( AR. Lakshmanan )------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Residence: No.1,Janpath, New Delhi-110011. Tel.:91-11-23019465.23793488.23792745E-mail:ch.lc@sb.nic.in
7PROPOSAL FOR RECONSIDERATION OF JUDGES CASES I, II &III – S.P..Gupta Vs UOI reported in AIR 1982 SupremeCourt Advocates on Record Association Vs UOIreported in 1993(4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SCC 739Preface : Part 11) Why reconsideration? The Supreme Court inSubhash Sharma Vs U.O.I. (reported in 1991(1)Supp. SCC 594) presided over by Ranganath MisraCJ, M.N. Venkatachaliah and M.M. Punchi JJ hadexpressed, doubts about the correctness of theinterpretation of the word “consultation” inregard to the appointment of judges in S.P.Gupta Vs U.O.I. (reported in 1982 SC 149) in thefollowing words (in paras 43 & 45 of the saidjudgment):-“The word ‘consultation’ is used in aconstitutional provision in recognition of thestatus of the High constitutional dignitary who
Page 1 and 2: GOVERNMENT OF INDIALAW COMMISSION O
Page 3 and 4: 3The 18 th Law Commission was const
Page 5: 5The text of this Report is availab
Page 9 and 10: 9the judicial wing.But to contempla
Page 11 and 12: 11the special and pivotal position
Page 13 and 14: 13E.S. Venkataramaiah JJ, in S.P. G
Page 15 and 16: 15Chief Justice of India that is pr
Page 17 and 18: 17of which is reproduced in the suc
Page 19 and 20: 19contributing and leave unsaid wha
Page 21 and 22: 21Para 491 - “At the outset, I mu
Page 23 and 24: 23in support of the conclusions rea
Page 25 and 26: 25Supreme Court and the High Courts
Page 27 and 28: 27be deemed to be punitive, and suc
Page 29 and 30: 29“This opinion has to be formed
Page 31 and 32: 31the opinion of the other function
Page 33 and 34: 33Supreme Court [Article 124 (2) of
Page 35 and 36: 353.Whether Article 124(2) as inter
Page 37 and 38: 378.Whether the Chief Justice of In
Page 39 and 40: 39Court to which the transfer is to
Page 41 and 42: 41the extent set out in the body of
Page 43 and 44: 43Provided that in the case of appo
Page 45 and 46: 45be consulted.The President should
Page 47 and 48: 47be followed in arriving at the Ch
Page 49 and 50: 49739, is urgently and immediately
Page 51 and 52: 51Chief Justice of the country. The
Page 53 and 54: 53Indian Constitution provides a be
Page 55 and 56: 55to adjudge the legal acumen. Thei
Page 57 and 58:
57“There was no problem till 1993
Page 59 and 60:
59It may be noted in this context t
show all

214th Report - Law Commission of India

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?