Jharkhand Files Contempt Against Centre Over HC Chief Justice Appointment: CJI Informs AG

September 19, Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud informed the Attorney General (AG) of India about a contempt petition filed by the State of Jharkhand against the central government. This petition concerns the delayed appointment of the Chief Justice for the Jharkhand High Court. The Attorney General, however, stated that he had not been aware of this petition. “There is also a contempt petition filed by the State of Jharkhand...it was brought to my attention only last night, when I was heading home, that Jharkhand has filed contempt proceedings against the Union of India,” CJI Chandrachud explained. This conversation took place after the AG mentioned a separate petition, related to the appointment of judges, which is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow. The AG requested an adjournment of this matter. Attorney General R. Venkataramani suggested that the Centre is likely to decide soon on the pending Collegium resolutions regarding appointments of Chief Justices in various High Courts. "I request that the matter regarding the judges' appointments listed for tomorrow be postponed by a week or so. I should be able to provide an update by then. Let’s not take it up tomorrow," the AG said, referring to a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions for the Union Government to address Collegium recommendations within a specific timeframe. In response, the CJI noted that the list for tomorrow had already been finalized and stated that the matter would stay on the schedule. He suggested that the AG could raise the issue again when the petitioner is present. The Supreme Court Collegium had, on July 11, recommended the appointment of Chief Justices to eight High Courts. However, these recommendations remain pending with the central government. During a hearing last week regarding the same petition on judges' appointments, the AG told the Court that he wished to disclose some “sensitive information” about the Collegium's recommendations. As a result, the matter was deferred until September 20. Meanwhile, on September 17, the Collegium revised three of its earlier recommendations from the July 11 resolution. www.legalmeet.in