[ad_1]
Judges Appointment: Advocate Laxman Chandra Victoria Gauri was on Tuesday sworn in as an additional judge of the Madras High Court. At the same time, the Supreme Court today refused to consider the petition requesting to stop Victoria Gauri from taking oath as a judge.
Acting Chief Justice administered the oath
Victoria Gauri was sworn in as an additional judge of the Madras High Court amid the hearing of a petition challenging her appointment to the top court. Madras High Court’s Acting Chief Justice T Raja administered the oath of office to Victoria Gauri as Additional Judge after completing other formalities including reading out the appointment order issued by the President. Apart from Victoria Gauri, 4 others also took oath as Additional Judges of the Madras High Court in Chennai.
Hearing in SC on the petition filed against the decision of appointment
A special bench of Justice Sanjay Khanna and Justice BR Gavai sat 5 minutes before the scheduled time of the court i.e. at 10.25 am to hear the petition filed against the decision to appoint Victoria Gauri as Additional Judge. The bench said, we are not going to consider the writ petition. The reason will be given. Acting Chief Justice of the Madras High Court administered the oath to Gauri at 10.48 a.m. when the top court was hearing arguments on why she should not be made a judge.
Gauri is appointed as additional judge: Supreme Court
During the hearing, the bench told senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, appearing for the petitioners, that there is a difference between eligibility and suitability. On this, Ramachandran referred to Article 217 of the Constitution, which deals with the appointment and terms of office of a High Court judge. He argued that a person who does not conform to the ideals and basic principles of the Constitution is unfit to take the oath because the oath speaks of true faith and allegiance to the Constitution. The bench said that the petitioners have placed some material on record and these things should also be placed before the Collegium, which recommended Gauri’s name as a High Court judge. The bench said, when the collegium takes a decision, it also takes the opinion of the advisory judges of the concerned High Court and you cannot say that the judges of the concerned High Court are not aware of all these things. The top court said that Gauri is appointed as an additional judge of the High Court.
It was said in the petition
The bench said, if the candidate is not sincere to the oath and it is found that he has not performed the duties as per the oath, is the collegium not empowered to take cognizance of it? There have been many such cases in which the appointment of people has not been confirmed. The top court on Monday decided to hear on February 7 a petition challenging Gauri’s appointment as a judge in the Madras High Court. The Center had notified Gauri’s appointment as a judge just before the apex court verdict. Petitioner lawyers Anna Mathew, Sudha Ramalingam and D Nagasala had referred to alleged hateful remarks made by Gauri against Muslims and Christians in their petition. It was said in the petition, in view of the serious threat to the independence of the judiciary, the petitioner is seeking to issue an appropriate interim order to prevent the fourth respondent (Gauri) from taking oath as a judge of the High Court.
[ad_2]
Source link