M/S. PLR PROJECTS PVT. LTD. versus MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 4 S.C.R. 153 · Decided: 20-04-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.A. BOBDE, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SURYA KANT · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
153
   [2021] 4 S.C.R. 153
153
M/s. PLR PROJECTS PVT. LTD.
v.
MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD. & ORS.
(Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 2419 of 2019)
APRIL 20, 2021
[S.A. BOBDE, CJI, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND
SURYA KANT, JJ.]
Judiciary – Appointment of High Court Judges – Vacancies
in High Courts – Certain timelines were stated for appointment of
Judges to the High Court in the Memorandum of Procedure as
finalized by the Supreme Court Collegium on 10.03.2017 – In order
to facilitate timely appointment, following additional timelines
advised – The Intellligence Bureau (IB) would submit its report/
inputs within 4 to 6 weeks from the date of recommendation of the
High Court Collegium, to the Central Government – The Central
Government would then forward the file(s)/recommendations to the
Supreme Court within 8 to 12 weeks from the date of receipt of
views from the State Government and the report/input from the IB –
The Government would thereafter proceed to make the appointment
immediately on the aforesaid consideration – In case of
Government’s reservations on suitability or in public interest, within
the same period of time it may be sent back to the Supreme Court
Collegium with the specific reasons for reservation recorded – If
the Supreme Court Collegium after consideration of the aforesaid
inputs still reiterates the recommendation(s) unanimously (Cl. 24.1),
such appointment should be processed and appointment should be
made within 3 to 4 weeks.
Third Judge’s case (1998) 7 SCC (Special Reference
1 of 1998) – referred to
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION :  Transfer Petition (Civil)
No.2419 of 2019.
Petition under Article 139A(2) of the Constitution of India seeking
transfer of Writ Petition Civil No. 17476 of 2019 Pending before the
High Court of Odisha, Cuttack to the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana
or any other High Court.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
154
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 4 S.C.R.
Kaushik Poddar, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Sunil Kumar, Ravindra Shrivastava, Ashok Panda, Vikas Singh,
Mahalakshmi Pavani, Sr. Advs., Sibo Sankar Mishra, Niranjan Sahu,
Umakant Mishra, Ashok Kumar Singh, Rajiv Sinha, Kunal Chatterji, Ms.
Maitrayee Banerjee, Pravar Veer Misra, Kedar Nath Tripathy, Ms.
Preetika Dwivedi, S.N. Bhat, V.N. Raghupathy, Shibashish Misra,
Dhananjai Jain, Gautam Narayan, Ms. Asmita Singh, Ms. Dacchita Shahi,
Adithya Nair, Ms. RitikaVohra, Shantanu Sagar, Himanshu Shekhar,
Jamnesh Kumar, Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Amit Kumar Singh, Apratim
Animesh Thakur, Ms. Prachihasija, Arjun Garg, Ms. Shrutika Garg, Gopal
Jha, Shreyash Bhardwaj, Ms. Renuka Sahu, Abhimanyu Tewari, Naresh
K. Sharma, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Ms. Shobha Gupta, Ms. Sneha Kalita,
Ms. Prerna Kumari, Ms. Bristi Rekha Mahanta, Ms. Sudha Pal, Ms.
Mansa Singh, Ms. Bhakti Pasrija Sethi, Ms. Priyanka S. Mathur, Ms.
Deepika Kalra, Ms. Preeti Singh, Ms. Reena Rao, Ms. Ruchi Khurana,
Ms. Sakie Jhakaria, Ms. Savita Singh, Ms. Sobha, Ms. Swati Garg, Ms.
Yugandhara Pawar Jha, Ms. Priyanka Das, Ms. Ritu Bharadwaj, Ms.
Manjula Gupta, Ms. Madhumita Bhattacharjee, Ms. Subra Saha, Ms.
Neka Tandon Phookan, Ms. Inklee Roy Baruah, Ms. Maheravish Rein,
Ms. Supriya Jain, Ms. Jessy Kurian, Advs. for the Respondents.
The following order of the Court was passed:
ORDER
1. The High Courts are in a crisis situation. There are almost 40%
vacancies in the High Courts, with many of the larger High Courts working
under 50% of their sanctioned strength.
2. We have discussed in detail the aforesaid while dealing with
the aspect of appointment of ad hoc Judges under Article 224A of the
Constitution of India in WP(C) No.1236/2019. Vide separate order in
the aforementioned matter passed today, we have also discussed the
process of appointment under Articles 217 & 224 of the Constitution of
India.
3. Learned Attorney General has placed before us the appointment
position in the High Courts to contend that against the sanctioned strength
of 1080 Judges, 664 Judges have been appointed with vacancies of 416
Judges. However, the recommendations received and under process
with the Government are 196 leaving 220 recommendations to be
received.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
155
4. We cannot but note the importance of the Chief Justices of the
High Courts making recommendations in time. The vacancies are known
and the norms permit making recommendations up to six months in
advance. However, even recommendations for 220 existing vacancies
appear not to have been made much less for vacancies, which are going
to arise in the ne
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.