2003 (1) TMI 729 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Authority of the Acting Chief Justice to constitute a Committee.
2. Requirement of consultation with all Judges for evolving merit criteria.
3. Validity of the Full Court's approval of the Committee's recommendations.

Summary:

1. Authority of the Acting Chief Justice to constitute a Committee:
The Supreme Court examined whether the Acting Chief Justice had the jurisdiction to constitute a Committee of two Judges to recommend criteria for the grant of selection scale. The Court held that the Chief Justice has the requisite jurisdiction to constitute such a Committee, and the report of the Committee, upon consultation with all the Judges of the High Court in terms of Rule 15, becomes a decision of the Court. The Court emphasized that the Chief Justice's power to constitute a Committee is supported by Rule 21(2) of the Rules, which allows the Chief Justice to allocate administrative business to any Judge or Committee of Judges. Therefore, the High Court erred in finding the constitution of the Committee illegal.

2. Requirement of consultation with all Judges for evolving merit criteria:
The Supreme Court addressed whether all Judges of the High Court needed to be consulted before evolving merit criteria for the selection scale. The Court clarified that Rule 15 of the Rules does not require prior consultation with all Judges for initiating the process of laying down merit criteria. The Committee's recommendations were subject to the approval of the Full Court, which was duly obtained. The Court noted that consultation with all Judges does not mean that every Judge must be present; a quorum as per Rule 29 suffices. The Court rejected the contention that the Committee's criteria were invalid due to lack of prior consultation with all Judges.

3. Validity of the Full Court's approval of the Committee's recommendations:
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Full Court's approval of the Committee's recommendations. The Court stated that once the Full Court approves the recommendations, they become the decision of the Court. The Court also noted that any irregularity in the initial procedure can be ratified by the Full Court, making the decision valid retrospectively. The Court found that the High Court's judgment failed to consider that Rule 15 does not require prior approval for initiating actions by the Chief Justice and that the Full Court's subsequent approval cured any procedural defects.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, holding that the Acting Chief Justice had the authority to constitute the Committee, the consultation process was valid, and the Full Court's approval legitimized the Committee's recommendations. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned judgment was deemed unsustainable.