R N NANJUNDAPPA Vs. PRESIDENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RELYING upon the observations made by the Supreme Court in para 478 of its judgment in supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association Union of India and Another and on the basis of the newspaper report published in "the Hindu" daily of Bangalore Edition, dated 30th august, 1997, the petitioner has filed this public interest litigation with prayer for direction to the 1st respondent for not issuing the warrant of appointment, appointing the 4th respondent as a judge of the Supreme Court of India on the recommendations of the 2nd respondent. We are satisfied that as no fundamental or legal right of any citizen has been infringed, the petition is not maintainable. This petition is also not entertainable by this Court as no part of the cause of action has accrued to the petitioner within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The Supreme Court in the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association's case, supra, has categorically held that the recommendations made by the Chief Justice of India are not justiciable and are not open to judicial review. While dealing with the extent and scope of the judicial review it has been held: "it is, therefore, necessary to spell out clearly the limited scope of judicial review in such matters, to avoid similar situations in future. Except on the ground of want of consultation with the named constitutional functionaries or lack of any condition of eligibility in the case of an appointment, or of a transfer being made without the recommendation of the Chief Justice of india, these matters are not justiciable on any other ground, including that of bias, which in any case is excluded by the element of plurality in the process of decision-making". There is no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed.