Judicial Appointments in a Limbo: The Executive’s Unchecked Veto

The Judiciary is frequently criticised for keeping judicial appointments an opaque affair. However, the process is facing a silent crisis of executive delay. Recently, the Supreme Court released a list of candidates who were recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium, but were not appointed as High Court Judges by the Ministry of Law and Justice since 2022. This systemic issue was further underscored by research conducted by the Supreme Court Observer, which found that the Central Government did not accept 24% of all recommendations by Justice Sanjiv Khanna’s Collegium. This piece aims to argue that this unnecessary practice of the Central Government not only exacerbates the predicament of vacancies in the High Courts, but also constitutes a grave violation of the principle of Separation of Powers.

0

In conversation with Swapnil Tripathi

In this interview conducted by CLS, we talk to Swapnil Tripathi.Swapnil is the Lead at Charkha (Centre for Constitutional Law) at Vidhi. His areas of specialisation are judicial review and constitutional interpretation, with a particular focus on Public Interest Litigation. He is also an Associate Fellow of the Royal Commonwealth Society, nominated in recognition of his work in the United Kingdom.

0

Doctrine of Manifest Arbitrariness: Moving Towards A Wider ‘Reasonableness’ Review [Part II]

Image of Supreme Court against blue sky.

This blog analyses the characterizstion of arbitrariness as an enemy to equality, contending that while the Classification Doctrine and the older Non-Arbitrariness Doctrine both operate primarily as formal, process-based rationality requirements, focused on the means-end connection, the Manifest Arbitrariness Doctrine introduces a more normative, effects-based evaluation of both ends and means.

0

Doctrine of Manifest Arbitrariness: Moving Towards A Wider ‘Reasonableness’ Review [Part I]

Image of Supreme Court against blue sky.

This blog analyses the characterizstion of arbitrariness as an enemy to equality, contending that while the Classification Doctrine and the older Non-Arbitrariness Doctrine both operate primarily as formal, process-based rationality requirements, focused on the means-end connection, the Manifest Arbitrariness Doctrine introduces a more normative, effects-based evaluation of both ends and means.

0

Is the Constituent Assembly Still Supreme? Revisiting the Bar of Article 329

Members of the Constituent Assembly of India.

The Constituent Assembly encapsulated the separation of power in numerous provisions to prevent the eclipse of liberties of the citizens. In this architecture, certain provisions like Article 329 stand as near-impenetrable walls, barring judicial scrutiny of electoral and delimitation matters. These provisions which once vanguard the liberties of citizens, now safeguards potential arbitrariness from challenge. The author interrogates this constitutional paradox and navigates the tension between reverence for founding texts and the evolving demands of constitutional morality.

0

Up ↑