Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Hindu
The Hindu
National
The Hindu Bureau

Centre notifies appointment of 17 judges across eight High Courts

The Centre on Wednesday notified the appointment of 17 judges across eight High Courts and the transfer of 16 judges across several High Courts, including the acting Chief Justice of Manipur.

The move came days after the Supreme Court had expressed its displeasure over delay in appointment and transfer of High Court judges.

The latest round of transfers included Justice M.V. Muralidharan, the acting Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court, to the Calcutta High Court. Recently, the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended the transfer of Justice Muralidharan to the Calcutta High Court for “better administration of justice”.

Justice Muralidharan’s order in March to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list is said to be one of the triggers for the violence that erupted in Manipur in May.

Among those who have been appointed as judges in eight High Courts, 11 are judicial officers, while six are advocates.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended the names of 13 advocates as judges of different High Courts.

The Collegium, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sanjiv Khanna, recommended the names of advocates N. Unni Krishnan Nair, and Kaushik Goswami as judges of the Gauhati High Court.

In another decision, the Collegium has recommended the names of advocates Siddhartha Sah and Alok Mahra for appointment as judges of the Uttarakhand High Court.

It has also recommended the names of advocates Harmeet Singh Grewal, Deepinder Singh Nalwa, Sumeet Goel, Sudeepti Sharma and Kirti Singh for appointment as judges of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

The Collegium has also recommended the names of advocates Vinay Saraf, Vivek Jain, Ashish Shroti, and Amit Seth for appointment as judges of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The Collegium said the recommendations made on October 17 were based on consultations with colleagues and assessment of the fitness and suitability of the advocates for appointment as judges.

The Collegium said it had scrutinised and evaluated the material placed on record, including the observations made by the Department of Justice in the file as well as the complaints received against some of the candidates.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.