Why Withholding Judicial Appointments Is a Threat to India's Independent Judiciary

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) has strongly criticized the Union Government for delaying the appointments of Advocate Swetasree Majumdar and Advocate Rajesh Datar as judges, even though their names were recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium.

In a statement released today, CJAR said that the Centre’s decision to withhold their appointments—while processing other names from the same list—was unconstitutional and against established legal rulings. They have called on the Supreme Court to step in and demand an explanation from the Union Government.

What Happened?

Advocates Swetasree Majumdar and Rajesh Datar had both been recommended for elevation to the High Courts by the Supreme Court Collegium. However, their names were “segregated”—meaning separated from the list—and kept pending, while others on the list were cleared and appointed. This unexplained delay eventually led both advocates to withdraw their consent for judgeship.

CJAR’s statement strongly criticizes this move, calling it “illegal and unconstitutional.” They also remind that this kind of selective appointment process violates the Second Judges (1994) and Third Judges (1999) Supreme Court rulings, which clearly say that the government cannot pick and choose from the list of names recommended by the Collegium.

A Pattern of Delay:

This is not the first time such an issue has occurred. In 2022, Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi also withdrew his consent for judgeship after facing a similar situation. CJAR expressed disappointment that the Supreme Court Collegium has not taken steps to prevent such repeated incidents.

Moreover, a writ petition has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2018, seeking a legal direction to the government to ensure timely judicial appointments. It also asks the Court to stop the government from unilaterally separating names from the Collegium's recommendations—a practice that CJAR believes is undermining the entire appointment process. Unfortunately, no significant orders have been passed on this petition so far.

A Call for Urgent Action:

CJAR has urged the Supreme Court to take immediate action against what they describe as the government’s “willful disregard” of both the law and the Constitution. The group warns that if such practices continue, they will damage the independence of the judiciary—a key pillar of India’s democracy.

They acknowledged recent improvements, such as the Supreme Court Collegium interviewing potential candidates more carefully. However, they stressed that these efforts will mean nothing if the government continues to block or ignore qualified nominees without any valid reason.

Why This Matters:

Judicial appointments are not just about filling vacancies—they are about upholding justice, fairness, and the Constitution. When the government delays or selectively approves names recommended by the Collegium, it sets a dangerous precedent that could lead to political interference in the judiciary.

It’s essential that the judicial appointment process stays transparent, timely, and based on merit—not on politics.