The apex court also took exception to the conduct of a judge of the Madras High Court who on January 9 had walked in as a special bench was hearing a PIL against the proposed appointment of new judges and said the choice of probables was not fair.
“It is a very serious matter not only for the institution but also otherwise,” a bench comprising justices B S Chauhan and J Chelameswar observed while restraining a division bench of the High Court from further proceeding with the matter.
The apex court also put in ‘abeyance’ the January 9 direction of the High Court directing the Union Law Ministry to maintain status quo in respect of the list of 12 names forwarded by the Madras High Court.
It said the “gravity of the situation” has to be taken into consideration,” and the matter has to be withdrawn from the High Court and has to be heard here (apex court) by a three-judge bench.
The bench accepted the submission of Attorney General G E Vahanvati that such a serious matter cannot be heard in the atmosphere of commotion and alleged indulgence of a sitting judge who had walked into the courtroom during the hearing.
The apex court said if the sitting judge walked into the courtroom, he should have been made party to the petition filed by the Madras High Court before it.
“If he (the judge) has made a comment he should be made a party. You understand the implication. Unless he is made party he can’t say anything on his conduct,” the bench said. Justice C S Karnan had taken everyone by surprise as he entered the courtroom and had said, “The selection is unfair. I am also a part of the judiciary. I want to file an affidavit in my own name. Please take note of it.”