Open letter to the CJI complaining of the rejection of the petition against the Collegium by his Registrar
Open letter to the CJI complaining of the rejection of the petition against the Collegium by his Registrar
MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA
Advocate
05.10.2024
101, Gundecha Chambers, Nagindas Master Rd, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400001
Mob: +91 98205 35428/99679 69256
E-mail: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com
5th October, 2024
OPEN LETTER
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr D.Y. Chandrachud
Chief Justice of India
May it please your Lordship,
Sub: Rejection of W.P (diary) no. 41768 of 2024 instituted by my humble self and 9 other citizens, lawyers and litigants, in challenge of the order dated 24.4.2024 of the Registrar, Judicial, dismissing W.P no. 1005 of 2022 seeking the abolition of the collegium and seeking restoration of the NJAC, an open, transparent, competitive, merit-based selection of the judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court, by de-registering the same. Complaint – reg.
1. I address your Lordship with a heavy heart as one who has spent a lifetime as a lawyer and the last 20 years on reforms in judiciary.
2. The Judges-2 case and the collegium, its off-spring, is the single greatest calamity which the institution of judiciary and our democracy has faced since independence. I did everything humanly possible despite my insignificance to defend the NJAC and to ensure that the motivated challenge through SCOARA is defeated, though in vain. However, I was determined not to accept the said defeat as a fait accompli. The reason is my faith in the institution of judiciary and the vitality of the concept of democracy. All institutions, being manned by fallible human beings are prone to errors, but no institution can persist in error forever. It is in that hope that my colleagues and I instituted –what has now become– a large number of petitions in the Supreme Court and High Courts seeking an open and transparent selection and appointment of judges, implementation of the transfer policy, abolition of the designation system etc. In doing so, we even defied the logic of the common man in that how could a citizen expect orders against the interest of the judges from the judges themselves. My stand here is a matter of principle. The Collegium and other malaises are the creation of the judiciary itself, and therefore, one must place all faith in the judges themselves to undo the same. All that may be required is persistent efforts. “Dripping water hollows out stone, not through force but through persistence”.
3. As your Lordship would graciously recollect, W.P (c) no. 1005/2022, I had mentioned before your lordships at least 5 times in a span of one and a half years. On all occasions your lordship was kind enough to assure me an early listing. I met the Registrar many a times as a follow up because what your lordship said in the open court was not acted upon. What pained me more than anything else is that the very next day after 5th or 6th mentioning before your lordships, the Registrar de-registered W.P no. 1005 of 2022 and dismissed it, without notice to us and without hearing us, entirely behind our back. It was in the above backdrop that we filed W.P (diary) no. 41768/2024 inter alia in challenge of the order of the Registrar, so too, the validity of Rule 5 Order XV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, arraying the Registrar as a Respondent. I could not believe my eyes, the case status reflects that the Registrar lodged, nay, rejected the petition, even without any notice to us.
4. It is difficult to fathom how a Registrar who is administratively a subordinate of your Lordship, duty bound to act on your lordships orders and directions, could dismiss W.P no. 1005 which your Lordship had assured several times in open court to hear, so too, W.P (diary) no. 41768 of 2024, challenging the Registrar’s action, which the court is competent to hear. I am sure your Lordship would take a serious note of what is stated above, which is an undeniable truth, and direct the corrective action to be taken to undo the grave injustice. In that unstinted faith, I remain, waiting correction to be taken.
With most respectful regards,
Yours Sincerely,
MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA
