President of India, 1981 (First Judges Case)
It ruled CJI had the right and duty to elicit and ascertain further facts from the judge concerned or others.It held that the President is under an obligation to consult the CJI, which meant that all relevant facts must be placed before the CJI.It reasoned that the transfer of power can be exercised only in public interest.The Supreme Court rejected the idea that High Court judges can be transferred only with their consent.What is the Supreme Court’s view on the issue? From time to time, there have been proposals that one-third of the composition of every High Court should have judges from other States.This means that the executive could transfer a judge, but only after consulting the Chief Justice of India.It also provides for a compensatory allowance to the transferred judge.It says the President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, may transfer a judge from one High Court to any other High Court.Article 222 of the Constitution provides for the transfer of High Court judges, including the Chief Justice.The transfer of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee from the Madras High Court to the Meghalaya High Court has given rise to a controversy over the question of whether judicial transfers are made only for administrative reasons or have any element of ‘punishment’ behind them. Mains level : Issues with Judicial Transfer From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
0 kommentar(er)
