LAWS(SC)-1981-6-1

V M TARKUNDE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On June 06, 1981
V M Tarkunde Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these interlocutory proceedings the question is what order this court should pass regarding the prayer for maintenance of status quo in respect of the two learned Judges of the Delhi High court (Justice Vohra and Justice Kumar) whose term the Union of India has decided not to extend pending final disposal by this court of serious and vital issues raised by the petitioner in his transferred writ petition.

(2.) It is true that this court by its Order dated 8/05/1981 directed the Union of India to take a decision whether any of the concerned three Additional Judges should be re appointed for a further term as Additional Judges or they should be appointed as permanent judges or otherwise and the expression 'or otherwise' in the order undoubtedly means that a decision not to extend their term and drop any of them could be taken by the Union of India. This court has now been informed that the decision to extend the term of Justice Wad has been taken and communicated to the chief justice of the Delhi high court and that a decision not to extend the terms of the other two Judges has been taken and hence there is no occasion to communicate that decision to anyone.

(3.) It was felt that when this court was seized of a serious matter raising vital questions of interpretation of the relevant Articles of the Constitution having a bearing on the independence of Judiciary. the Union of India could have been discreet not to have pre-empted the issues as it were by its aforesaid decision before this court decided the issue finally. I, therefore, made a suggestion to counsel for the respondents to ask the government to reconsider its decision and allow the learned Judges to continue as Additional Judges till the final decision on the merits of the issues raised in the writ petition was reached by this court. But it is unfortunate that the Union government has not seen its way to accept or to respond to the court's suggestion. Judicial decorum prevents me from making further comments.