Collegium's Exclusive Power Over High Court Judge Appointments Must Be Abolished

Nyaya Host · Intro

Aaj hum ek bahut hi mahatvapurna constitutional sawaal par vichar karenge — kya High Court judges ki niyukti mein Collegium ka ekchatra adhikar banana chahiye ya ise ek more accountable aur transparent prakriya se replace kiya jana chahiye. Yeh debate nahi, yeh ek legal awareness ka manch hai jahan dono paksh apne tark rakhenge aur hum milkar samjhenge ki is mudde ke alag-alag pehlu kya hain. Toh ab main Counsel Aarav se nivedan karungi ki woh apna paksh rakhein aur is mahatvapurna sawaal par apne tark pesh karein.

Aarav Paksh · For

My lord, main yeh clearly kehna chahta hoon ki Collegium system — jisme ek closed group of judges apne hi peers ko recommend karta hai bina kisi statutory framework ya external accountability ke — yeh constitutionally unsustainable hai. Article 216 ke under High Court judges ki appointment ka power President mein vested hai, aur Constitution ke framers ne kabhi nahi socha tha ki ek unelected, opaque judicial caucus us power ko effectively hijack kar lega. NJAC Act, 2014 ka Section 6 ek far superior model deta hai — jisme ability, merit, consultation aur transparency ka structured process hai — jo is Court ko dikhata hai ki exclusive collegium power ki koi constitutional necessity nahi thi, yeh to ek judge-made construct hai jo replace kiya ja sakta hai.

Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION ACT, 2014 · Section 6

Bina Vipaksh · Against

My lord, vipaksh ki taraf se main yeh kehna chahti hoon ki Collegium ki exclusive power ko khatam karna judicial independence ke liye ek seedha khatra hai — aur paksh ne yeh nahi bataya ki Article 216 ke tahat President ko judge niyukt karne ki power hai, lekin woh power aaj bhi executive ke political dabaav se mukt nahin hogi bina ek independent selection mechanism ke. NJAC Act, 2014 ki Section 6 ko Supreme Court ne is liye khaarij kiya tha kyunki usmein executive aur legislative members ko veto power milti thi — jo judicial independence ke basic structure ko todti thi. Isliye Collegium ko todna nahi, balki uski transparency badhana zaruri hai — aur yahi asli sawaal hai jo paksh conveniently avoid kar raha hai.

Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION ACT, 2014 · Section 6

Aarav Paksh · Rebuttal

My Lord, vipaksh yeh bhool gaya ki Article 216 ke tahat High Court judges ki appointment ka poora dhanchha President ke haath mein hai — aur Constitution ne kabhi yeh exclusive power Collegium ko nahi di, yeh toh judicial interpretation ka product hai. Ab Article 124B aur NJAC Act 2014 ki Section 6 ek transparent, multi-stakeholder mechanism laati thi — jisme Chief Justice ki nomination bhi thi, do senior judges ki salah bhi thi, aur ability-integrity ka test bhi — lekin Supreme Court ne use strik down kar diya bina koi alternative accountability framework diye. Isliye main kehta hoon: Collegium ka yeh ekaadhikar nahi todna chahiye, yeh ek constitutional zaroorat hai.

Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; Constitution of India · Article 226; THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION ACT, 2014 · Section 6

Bina Vipaksh · Rebuttal

My lord, paksh ne Article 216 ka sahara liya — lekin us provision mein sirf yeh likha hai ki 'President may from time to time deem it necessary to appoint'; woh constitutional text khud collegium ki supremacy ko mandate nahi karta, balki executive participation ko khula rakhta hai. Aur Article 124B — jo NJAC ke functions define karta tha — woh isi liye laya gaya tha taaki ek plural, accountable body recommend kare, jisme ability aur integrity dono ensure ho; usse Supreme Court ne strike kiya, lekin woh political question tha, constitutional zaroorat nahi. Main yeh maanti hoon ki ek non-partisan, structured commission — jaise Article 124B ke under NJAC — judicial independence aur democratic accountability dono ko balance kar sakti hai, aur collegium ke ek-taraf monopoly ko khatam karna nahi, balki usse replace karna hi asli reform hai.

Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; Constitution of India · Article 226

Nyaya Host · Suggestion

Aaj ki is debate mein, ek taraf ka kehna tha ki Collegium system judicial independence ki raksha karta hai aur kisi bhi executive interference se nyaypalika ko bachata hai — jabki doosri taraf ka tark tha ki yeh system opaque, unaccountable aur constitutionally unsupported hai, aur NJAC jaisi ek broad-based, transparent body zaroori hai. Meri balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: Article 216 ke tahat appointments ki power constitutionally President mein hai, aur NJAC Act 2014 ka Section 6 ek aise inclusive mechanism ki tasveer pesh karta tha jisme judiciary, executive aur civil society — teeno ki bhagidari hoti; isliye parliament ko chahiye ki woh ek aisa reformed appointment framework banaye jo judicial primacy bhi surakshit rakhe aur saath hi transparency tatha accountability bhi sunishchit kare — jo Supreme Court ki 5-judge bench ki concerns ko sambodhit kare bina judicial independence se samjhauta kiye. Ab main citizens se anurodh karti hoon ki is debate ko rate karein aur apni raay saajha karein.

Ref: Constitution of India · Article 226; THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION ACT, 2014 · Section 6