To
Smt Droupadi Murmu
President of India
Rashtrapati Bhawan
Respected Rashtrapati Ji,
On the 27th of September, 2021, I made an appeal to your predecessor that there was urgent need to mandate reservations for the SCs/STs/OBCs and women at the higher levels of judiciary to ensure that the judiciary at all levels would be in a position to deliver justice in a manner that reflects the point of view of such disadvantaged sections of the society (https://countercurrents.org/2021/09/need-for-reservations-in-judiciary-for-women-scs-sts-obcs/)
On this issue, the stock reply given by successive governments has been
“Appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are made under Article 124, 217 and 224 of the Constitution respectively. These Articles do not provide for reservation for any caste or class of person including women. Therefore, no caste or class-wise data of Judges is maintained. However, the Government is committed to social diversity in the appointment of Judges in the High Courts and has been requesting the Chief Justices of the High Courts that while sending proposals for appointment of Judges, due consideration be given to suitable candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Minorities and Women.”
Despite this, as on date, the representation of the disadvantaged sections of the society in the higher echelons of the judiciary has remained abysmally inadequate, far less than what their proportion in the population calls for.
At least two Parliamentary Committees, the
Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (2000-01) of the 13th Lok Sabha, in their report submitted to the Parliament in April, 2001 and the Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law & Justice, it its 21stReport on the Judges (Inquiry) Bill, 2006, presented to the Parliament on 17th August 2007, recommended a statutory provision being made for reservations in the judiciary for the SCS/STs/OBCs.
In WP No. 1303/1987 (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record vs Union Of India), while pronouncing their judgement on 6th October, 1993, the apex court observed as follows:
“In the context of the plurastic society of India where there are several distinct and differing interests of the people with multiplicity of religion, race, caste and community and with the plurality of culture brought together and harmonised by the Constitution makers by assuring each section, class and society ‘equality of status and of opportunity, it is inevitable that all people should be given equal opportunity in all walks of life and brought into the mainstream so that there may be participation of all sections of people in every sphere including the judiciary. The Government which is accountable to the people has its constitutional obligation to treat all alike and afford them equal opportunity in all spheres including the superior judiciary. It is essential and vital for the establishment of real participatory democracy that all sections and classes of people, be they backward classes or scheduled castes or scheduled tribes or minorities or women, should be afforded equal opportunity so that the judicial administration is also participated in by the outstanding and meritorious candidates belonging to all sections of the society not by any selective or insular group”
Against the above background, it is desirable that the Parliament, either through an amendment to the relevant provisions of the Constitution or otherwise, mandates reservation for the SCS/STs/OBCs, women and other disadvantaged classes in the judiciary at the earliest.
I would appeal to you, Rashtrapatiji, to intervene in this matter and advise the executive and the Parliament to proceed accordingly on priority, in the interest of upholding social justice.
Respectfully,
E A S Sarma
Former Secretary to the Government of India
Visakhapatnam
