The oath-taking ceremony of Punjab and Haryana high court chief justice-designate Ashwani Kumar Mishra will go ahead as scheduled at Punjab Lok Bhawan here at 9.30 am on Monday, despite the Punjab government’s opposition to his appointment.
Punjab governor Gulab Chand Kataria will administer the oath of office. Traditionally, the chief ministers of both Punjab and Haryana attend the oath-taking ceremony of the chief justice of the high court. However, in an unprecedented development, chief minister Bhagwant Mann is unlikely to attend Monday’s ceremony.
The Bar body said the appointment of judges and chief justices of high courts was governed by the constitutional framework and the law declared by the Supreme Court concerning the judicial appointments process. “Once the appointment has been made in accordance with the constitutional process, political disagreement cannot be permitted to undermine the authority, dignity or institutional independence of the judiciary,” the body said in a statement. Mann will leave for Delhi on Monday and is scheduled to meet jailed cabinet colleague Sanjeev Arora, according to an official spokesman.
The development comes a day after the Punjab cabinet objected to Mishra’s appointment as the full-time chief justice, demanding that the appointment and administration of oath be kept on hold until the state government’s views are obtained and duly considered. The state government has contended that the Union government notified the appointment without awaiting its views, in violation of the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointment and transfer of chief justices and judges of high courts. The cabinet has also accused the Centre of bypassing Punjab’s constitutional rights and termed the move part of a continued assault on the state’s rights. “The Punjab government had sufficient time to send its views, if they had any, within a week. Bar body terms govt stand ‘executive overreach’ The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association (PHHCBA), meanwhile, held an urgent meeting of its executive and condemned the Punjab government’s stand. “Any attempt to condition the assumption of office of a chief justice upon executive consent is antithetical to the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation of powers. Senior Congress leader Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa condemned the AAP government’s resolution opposing Mishra’s appointment and questioned whether the Punjab government respected the independence of the judiciary. “Courts are not departments of the Punjab government. Judges are not political appointees. “The Shiromani Akali Dal has stood firmly for an independent judiciary and constitutional institutions.
He said the Supreme Court Collegium had on August 6 recommended names for the appointment of chief justices of the Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, and Punjab and Haryana high courts in the first lot, followed by recommendations for Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir and Madhya Pradesh in the second lot. Jain said as required under the MoP, both the Punjab and Haryana governments were informed of the proposal and their views were sought on August 10. The governors of both states subsequently sent their approval, while the Haryana government also conveyed its views in favour of the proposal on August 12 and 13, he said.
Entire procedure followed: Jain Additional solicitor general Satya Pal Jain, however, termed the Punjab government’s reaction “most unfortunate and totally uncalled for”, asserting that the appointment had been made by the President of India, the highest constitutional authority, under Article 217(1) of the Constitution. Jain said the entire procedure prescribed under the Memorandum of Procedure had been followed and there had been “absolutely no violation or infringement of any provision of law”. The views of the state governments concerned were sought on the recommendations, according to Jain. He said all the state governments except Punjab sent their views within a week and the appointments were subsequently made. However, they did not send any views till date,” Jain said. He further contended that the views of state governments were anyway not binding, as the requirement was only to obtain their views and they had no “veto” over the appointment. “No one has the right to sit over the proposal for an indefinite period with a view to scuttle the judicial process and politicise the non-political issue,” Jain said. The PHHCBA termed the Punjab cabinet’s decision to hold a meeting on the issue a case of “executive overreach” and urged the government to preserve the sanctity of the high court and the dignity of the office of chief justice. It said the Bar could not remain a “mute spectator” where actions or statements of the executive had the effect of “casting a political shadow over a constitutional process”. However, BCPH member Suvir Sidhu said judicial appointments, particularly to the office of chief justice of a high court, were governed by the constitutional scheme and could not be made subject to the approval or veto of an elected state government. Punjab government must recall and withdraw its opposition,” Sidhu said. Randhawa said the appointment of chief justices was governed by the constitutional process involving the Supreme Court Collegium and the Union government. he said, turning the appointment into a political confrontation was “deeply concerning” While the Punjab government could express its views. “I strongly oppose any attempt to create the impression that the judiciary must first obtain the political approval of the ruling party,” he said. And judicial independence cannot be subject to the convenience of AAP,” Randhawa said, urging the government to stop politicising the issue, respect the constitutional process and raise any objections through appropriate legal channels. “The high court has delivered several strong judgments against the Punjab government, while matters concerning alleged corruption in the highest offices are reaching a crucial stage,” Cheema said in a post on X, adding that creating a controversy around the judiciary at such a juncture raised serious questions about the government’s intentions. We will strongly oppose every attempt to weaken, intimidate or politically interfere with the judiciary,” Cheema said.
The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana (BCPH) has not officially reacted to the issue so far. Punjab advocate general MS Bedi is the chairman of the body. Opposition parties slam AAP The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) also criticised Mann for opposing Mishra’s appointment as chief justice of the high court.
“The Bar will defend the rule of law, separation of powers and the independence, dignity and sanctity of the judiciary,” it said. SAD vice-president Daljit Singh Cheema said any attempt by the executive to question or influence judicial appointments undermined the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation of powers.
