Centre cites 'adverse' IB reports to reject appointment of former judges to tribunals
The Centre used 'confidential' inputs by the Intelligence Bureau to block post-retirement assignments to former judges. The appointment of six former judges was rejected by the Centre citing adverse Intelligence Bureau reports against them.
The appointments of two retired judges of the Supreme Court, two former high court judges and two retired chief justices of the high court. They were to be appointed as chairpersons and members of tribunals and commissions. However the Centre rejected the names sent out by the Supreme Court stating that the IB report against them was adverse in nature.
The court had recommended these names for the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, Competition Appellate Tribunal, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, National Company Law Tribunal and Armed Forces Tribunal.
Adverse IB reports:
The names of these judges were sent to the appointments committee of the Cabinet for approval. The committee cited adverse IB reports while rejecting the names of four judges. In the case of the other two judges, no reason had been assigned.
The committee noted that in the case of the two retired high court judges, the reports against them were adverse and this record was on their file. The Centre is not bound by the recommendations made by the judiciary in such cases. However, it would have to give valid reasons before rejecting the appointment. In the case of one former judge of the SC, the Centre however later disregarded the adverse IB report and appointed him to a tribunal.