On January 12, four Supreme Court docket Justices – Justice J. Chelameswar, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph – held a press conference to register their differences with the Chief Justice of India in issues connected to courtroom administration. Later, a letter they’ve written to the Chief Justice used to be made within the market to the media. One in every of the important thing points raised within the letter revolves around the term ‘grasp of the roster.’ Here is an explainer about what it approach and the context:
What does ‘grasp of the roster’ imply?
‘Master of the Roster’ refers again to the privilege of the Chief Justice to constitute Benches to listen to situations.
This privilege used to be emphasised in November final year, when a Structure Bench, led by the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, declared that “the Chief Justice is the grasp of the roster and he by myself has the prerogative to constitute the Benches of the Court docket and allocate situations to the Benches so constituted.”
It further stated that “no Take ought to purchase within the topic on this have, except allocated by the Chief Justice of India, as he’s the grasp of the roster.”
The fast trigger for this used to be a route by a two-resolve Bench (led by Justice Chelameswar) that a petition regarding a scientific college corruption case, provocative an alleged conspiracy to bribe Supreme Court docket judges, be heard by a Bench fo the five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court docket.
What is the self-discipline of the four judges on the ‘grasp of the roster’ enviornment?
They regard it as “one of many effectively-settled tips” and a convention that is predominant for an neat transaction of industry. However, they write within the letter, it isn’t a recognition of obliging authority of the Chief Justice over his colleagues. Their point is that the Chief Justice is most productive the “first amongst equals,” a phrase that Chief Justice Misra himself had passe within the Advertising and marketing and marketing campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms vs. Union of India repeat.
Of their letter, the four judges believe furthermore written that there are “effectively-settled and time honoured conventions guiding the Chief Justice” within the resolution of the roster, including those about the energy of the Bench to rental a explicit case. Of dull, they write, these rules haven’t been strictly adhered to.
“There believe been situations the save situations having some distance-reaching consequences for the nation and the institution had been assigned by the Chief Justice of this Court docket selectively to the Benches “of their preferences” with none rational basis for such assignment.”