The Bench and the Bar

A plea was filed in the Supreme Court yesterday challenging the validity of the law setting up the National Judicial Appointment Commission to replace the collegium system for appointments to the higher judiciary on grounds it was an assault on the constitution’s basic structure and the independence of judiciary, despite the apex court having declined to hear an earlier petition last year for being premature.

UPDATE:The Supreme Court declined to grant an urgent hearing by another petitioner, senior advocate Bhim Singh, reported The Hindu. 

The petition has also challenged the Constitution (Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014, that paved the way for the setting up of the commission. President Pranab Mukherjee had Dec 31, 2014, given his assent to the provision.

The parliament had in 2014 passed the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act so that government too may have a say in the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and the high courts. The apex court Aug 25, 2014, had declined to entertain the plea challenging the act as being premature holding that it had yet to attain legislative finality.

The petitioner Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, a senior counsel and former additional solicitor general of India, sought quashing of both the act and the constitutional amendment act as bothe were “arbitrary, unconstitutional and defaces/defies/damages basic structure/feature of the constitution”.

Bhattacharyya said that the apex court was “the only institution in the country which is fiercely and independently upholding the interest of the common man. Any attempt to dilute or damage its independence must be thwarted, rebuffed and repelled with a heavy hand”.

Referring to the various provisions of the two legislations, he said that it not only takes away the pivotal position that the chief justices of India had in the appointment and transfer of judges but vests it with the central government.

He also pointed a provision in the act under which the central government has been empowered to recommend the NJAC fill the vacancies of judges in the Supreme Court and the high courts, noting this was contrary to the task earlier performed by the five senior-most apex court judges under the collegium system.

The petition by Bhattacharyya points to another provision in the act which says that NJAC shall recommend for appointment of the senior-most Supreme Court judge as the chief justice of India if he is “considered fit” to hold office.

“The word ‘considered fit’ opens up the possibility of superseding the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court of India and preventing him/her from becoming the next chief justice of India,” it said.

“This would severely compromise with the independence of judiciary” as all that would be required to prevent the senior-most Supreme Court judge from becoming the chief justice of India is objection to his elevation even by two non-judicial members,” the petition said.

Of the six members of the NJAC, three would be the Chief Justice of India and two senior-most apex court judges, the union law minister and two eminent people - one of which shall be from scheduled castes, the scheduled tribes, other backward classes, minorities or women.

Pointing out how the provisions of the NJAC Act were an assault on the independence of judiciary, the petition said: “This clause gives veto power to any two (may be even two non-judicial members) to out-vote all the three judges of the Supreme Court put together” in appointments.

“This real and predictable possibility amounts to frontal attack on the three senior-most judges (including the CJI) of the Supreme Court and is aimed at destroying the independence of judiciary,” it said.

J Sagar Associates (JSA) has opened its seventh office in Ahmedabad on 1 January after hiring Bijal Chhatrapati from Singhi & Co as an equity partner to head up the office.

Senior partner Berjis Desai said in a press release: “For a few years, we had actively considered establishing our offices at Chennai and Ahmedabad these being cities where significant national law firms have not been present. Chennai office commenced operations in April 2014 and we are truly excited to open in Ahmedabad, in a State which has become a beacon for the economic development of the country.”

Chhatrapati focuses on dispute resolution, M&A and corporate commercial work and is a qualified Bombay solicitor, and commented in the release: “I am proud to be a part of a national law firm which is ahead of the fundamental changes that occur in a market. I have always admired JSA’s commitment to building a sharing, merit-based, empowering, and nurturing institution focussed on client servicing.”

JSA has six other offices in Bangalore, Chennai, Gurgaon, Hyderabad, Mumbai and Delhi, with over 340 lawyers and 80 Partners, according to the release.

The only other of the country’s six largest firms - the Big Six - with an office in Ahmedabad is Amarchand Mangaldas.

How can a first generation litigator survive? Advocate Dushyant Arora gives some handy tips.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) would submit its report on the possible re-accreditation of Delhi University in the first week of January 2015, the BCI secretary told the Delhi high court today in a writ petition challenging the disaffiliation of Delhi University’s law schools, reported the Economic Times.

Senior advocate Dushyant Dave has won the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) 2014 elections, with V Shekhar winning the vice-president race.

The NGO People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has recognised former Supreme Court Justice KS Panicker Radhakrishnan its man of the year award. In a press release, PETA wrote:

For heading the bench that passed the landmark judgement in favour of PETA India and the government body the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) clarifying that bulls must not be used in jallikattu, bull races, bullfights or any other type of performance and that called for animals to be respected in many other ways, Honourable Justice (Retd.) Mr. K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan, Supreme Court of India (SC), is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India’s Man of the Year.

Article 51a (g) of the Indian Constitution makes it the requirement of every Indian citizen to have compassion for living creatures,"explains PETA India CEO. “Retired Judge Radhakrishnan and Fernandez are role models in our society who uphold this mandate for kindness to animals through the actions they take, as we all should.”

The groundbreaking SC judgement passed earlier this year also referenced the concept of “speciesism”—discrimination against others simply for being another species—and compared it to other recognized wrongs: racism, castism and sexism. It also made clear that staged fights between animals, like cockfighting and dog-fighting, for entertainment must not be permitted; that education about humane treatment of animals is imperative; and that stronger penalties for cruelty to animals must be passed; among other animal-friendly verdicts.

Read original coverage of the landmark judgment here.