chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 1/6

Lordships at war: Former CJI blastsSupreme Court colleagues over'leaked' meeting details which'lowered his image'

By Gyanant Kumar Singh[1]

Published: 22:38 GMT, 23 July 2013 | Updated: 22:38 GMT, 23 July2013

Former Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir on Tuesday respondedto a rash of recent insinuations and allegations that he pushedthrough a key appointment days before passing on the baton to hissuccessor on July 18.

A deep rift in the Supreme Court Collegium, comprising fivesenior-most judges of the court, stood exposed as the former CJIissued a release saying that Chief Justice P. Sathasivam and othermembers of the Collegium had "themselves" fixed July 2 as thedate for consideration of a proposal to elevate the senior-mostjudge from Madhya Pradesh to the apex court.

The former CJI said that he was then told by the rest of theCollegium at the July 2 meeting that he was not in a position todeal with the appointment. He said the process for elevation of thehigh court Chief Justice, who was from Madhya Pradesh, began inOctober 2012 but was deferred "on one pretext or the other".

chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 2/6

Rift: Justice Altamas Kabir (far left) has been blamed for trying torush through a last-minute appointment, but claims the date forconsideration of the issue was chosen by Chief Justice PSathasivam (right) and others

chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 3/6

'Shot down'

The former CJI did not name anyone in particular, but said hesuggested the name of the judge once again on May 1, 2013 butdiscussion on the issue was "shot down" by one of the members ofthe Collegium.

"My attempts to bring up the matter for discussion was again shotdown as one of the members of the Collegium wanted time to findout about the background of the judge concerned," he said in arelease.

Justice Kabir said his request to convene a meeting of theCollegium before the court went for a seven week-long summervacation was also turned down. The suggestion to hold a meetingon July 2 did not "emanate from me" but from others, includingthe "present Chief Justice of India" and they were "fully aware" ofthe fact that by then the name of the new Chief Justice would havebeen notified.

On July 2, he was, however, told that no further meetings of theCollegium could be held as Justice Sathasivam had beennominated as the next CJI. He was also informed that the opinionof five previous Chief Justices had been taken in this regard.

Justice Kabir pointed out that he wanted representation fromMadhya Pradesh as the state had no representation since the judgefrom the state retired in August 2012. That there were differenceswithin the Collegium is a likely inference from the fact that CJIKabir (as he then was) seems to have been unaware of the opinionsought from five former Chief Justices until he was told about it atthe July 2 meeting.

chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 4/6

Justice Kabir said the confrontation in the meeting of theCollegium on July 2 had been "leaked to the press" but what wasreported was "a classic example of less than half truth in action".

Though he did not directly name anyone, he said "certain reportsbegan to appear just before I was to demit office as the ChiefJustice of India".

chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 5/6

The release went on to say: "People who have read the said articlesimmediately commented about the timing of the publication ofsuch articles."

The former CJI also responded to the charge by Gujarat High CourtChief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya that he was not elevatedbecause he had opposed appointment of Justice Kabir's sister as ajudge in the Calcutta High Court.

'Unanimous'

Pointing out that present CJI Sathasivam had spelt out in detail,during his farewell, the manner in which the Collegiumfunctioned, he said it was not possible for an individual to stop anelevation. In the case of Justice Bhattacharya, he said the decisionnot to elevate him was "unanimous".

Justice Kabir has also written to Justice Bhattacharya, with copiesto President Pranab Mukherjee and Prime Minister ManmohanSingh, to set the record straight on this issue.

In the letter, Justice Kabir says Justice Bhattacharya made"insensitive references" to his sister, going on to state that he hadrecused himself when her appointment was being considered.

"In your case, the matter was before a Collegium consisting of fivejudges who took a unanimous decision," the letter said.

Justice Kabir also sought to justify his recent order in favour ofSahara in connection with the high-profile case of refunding thesavings of thousands of small investors. The former CJI said it wasnot his personal decision but that of a bench, and that the time forpayment was extended to protect the interest of investors.

Mail Today repeatedly tried to get in touch with CJI P. Sathavisambut he remained unavailable for comment.

Share or comment on this article

chrome­extension://iooicodkiihhpojmmeghjclgihfjdjhj/in_isolation/reformat.html 6/6

1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Gyanant+Kumar+Singh

2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/index.html

3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/stats

Get a free Evernote account to save thisarticle and view it later on any device.

Create account

Comments ()

Share what you think

No comments have so far been submitted. Why not be the first tosend us your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message

boards.[2]

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Who is this week's top commenter? Find out now[3]

Links