None
Skip to mainRecently the central government has framed “standard operating procedure” regarding the appearance of the Government officials before courts in litigation involving the Government.
The SOP suggests that the presence of Government officials should be required in courts, only in exceptional cases and not as a regular practice.
However, Justice DY Chandrachud has expressed apprehensions, interpreting this move as an attempt by the central government to exert control over judicial reviews.
Under Article 50 of the constitution, there exists a clear demarcation between the executive and judiciary, and the government's intervention in determining who should be summoned or not is raising concerns. The government's recent focus on court conduct, more than seven decades after the constitution's inception, has drawn attention. The judiciary, a foundational pillar alongside the executive and legislature, serves as a check against unchecked executive actions. Throughout history, the judiciary has intervened to curb executive abuses of power.
The SOP suggests cautious treatment of Government officials, who, despite being public servants, are subject to the court's impartial judgments – judgments that inherently uphold the public's interests. This juxtaposition begs the question: Should there be a distinction in the court's treatment between public servants (Government officials) and ordinary citizens? The central government appears to seek a constitutional interpretation that aligns with their authoritative inclinations, potentially influencing court decisions to align with their ideology.
This incident occurs against the backdrop of the central government's ongoing critiques directed at the judiciary. These criticisms span issues ranging from judge appointments to case backlogs. Notably, former law minister Kiren Rijiju has even proposed the inclusion of executive figures within the judiciary. By intervening purportedly to foster a more harmonious relationship between the judiciary and the government, the central government's increasing involvement in daily court matters generates concerns. Therefore, it seems prudent to reject the suggested SOP entirely in order to safeguard the independence of the judiciary.
🕑 20 Sep,23 11:46a.m.
RCSWS demands pension hike at @ 5% at the age of 65, 70, 75 & 80
🕑 20 Sep,23 11:24a.m.
Merger of grades of PAO (Level 9) & SrAO (Level 10) & pay fixation
🕑 20 Sep,23 11:12a.m.
RSCWS DEMANDS RELHS benefits either for their Parents or Parents-in-law
🕑 19 Sep,23 9:59a.m.
Pay Fixation of CPSE Board Level Executives - Clarification
🕑 19 Sep,23 9:52a.m.
62nd NC JCM Standing Committee meeting to be held on 20.09.2023
🕑 15 Sep,23 11:03p.m.
Govt extends APAR deadlines for All India Services officers
🕑 15 Sep,23 10:54p.m.
A Rath Yatra by teachers' union demanding return of the Old Pension Scheme
🕑 09 Sep,23 9:08p.m.
How to check your National Pension Scheme balance without using the Umang app
🕑 02 Sep,23 8a.m.
What happens if DA crosses 50%? DA merger? 8th Pay Commission?
🕑 19 Aug,23 9:22a.m.
ICMR studiying on Sudden Deaths’ of youngsters in post COVID world
🕑 17 Aug,23 4:27p.m.
Section 197 of CrPC: A Safeguard Against Harassment of Public Servants
🕑 17 Aug,23 4:20p.m.
Benefits for being a central government employee
🕑 17 Aug,23 4:16p.m.
Some thoughts on 8th Central Pay Commission (CPC)
🕑 15 Aug,23 7:21p.m.
Empowering India's Future: Key Insights from PM Modi's Independence Day Address
🕑 07 Jun,23 10:56a.m.
Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS): A Comprehensive Guide
🕑 13 Apr,23 3:19p.m.
Pension system revision, will it go back to the old way?.