The collegium has recommended three names from each list.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court collegium, which has recommended six out of 10 nam-es of subordinate judicial officers for appointment as judges of the Madras HC, has found three others not suitable for appointment. In respect of one female judge, the collegium has kept the proposal pending and has sought further information from the high court.
The high court had sent two lists of judicial officers, the first containing four and the second with six names for the consideration of the apex court collegium. The collegium has recommended three names from each list.
Those in the first list are: S. Ramathilagam, R. Tharani, P. Rajamanick-am and Vasudevan V. Nad-athur. In respect of these names, the collegium said, “Considering the material on record, inclu-ding views of the consultee-judges and the judgment assessment report, the collegium finds S. Ra-mathilagam, R. Tharani, and P. Rajamanickam suitable for elevation to the HC bench. Keeping in mind the views of the consultee-judges and the material on record, the collegium is of the considered opinion that Vasudevan V. Nadathur is not suitable for elevation to the high court bench.
B. Sarojiny Devy, T. Krishnavalli, A. Zakir Hussain, R. Pongiappan, R. Hemalatha and K. Arul were in the second list.
Regarding these candidates, the collegium said, “As regards B. Sarodjiny Devy, keeping in view the fact that inquiry is pending against her in the high court, the collegium reso-lves that the Chief Justice of the Madras HC be requested to send further information with regard to the said inquiry. In view of the above, the proposal for her elevation is accordingly deferred for being resubmitted on rec-eipt of the above information from the Chief Jus-tice of the Madras high court.
As regards A. Zakir Hussain and K. Arul, keeping in view the material on record, including the report of Intelligence Bureau, they are not found suitable for elevation to the high court bench.
It said, “while considering the above proposal, we have also taken note of the fact that the above proposal involves non-recommendation of large number of senior Judicial Officers. Many of them have given representations putting forth their grievances of having been over-looked by the High Court Collegium. In this regard, we have gone through the letter dated 30th January 2017 of the then Chief Justice of the Madras High Court who has duly recorded reasons for not recommending names of these Judicial Officers. We are satisfied with the reasons assigned by the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court and find no merit in the said representations, which deserve to be rejected.”