The Punjab Cabinet has passed a resolution opposing the appointment of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. CM Bhagwant Mann has urged the Centre to halt the oath ceremony citing constitutional violations.
- Punjab Cabinet passed a resolution against the appointment of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra.
- CM Bhagwant Mann wrote to President Murmu and PM Modi to halt the oath ceremony.
- The state claims the Centre bypassed the 'Memorandum of Procedure' regarding state views.
- Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain called the state's objection 'unfortunate'.
Chandigarh: In a significant escalation of center-state friction, the Punjab government has formally objected to the appointment of Ashwani Kumar Mishra as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Following an emergency cabinet meeting on Sunday evening, the state government passed a resolution demanding that the administration of the oath be put on hold until the state's views are duly considered and addressed.
Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann has taken a direct stance by writing separate letters to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Mann emphasized that the appointment process bypassed established constitutional norms and the prescribed 'Memorandum of Procedure' (MoP). The state government contends that the Centre's decision to notify the appointment on Saturday, ahead of the scheduled Monday oath ceremony, undermines the federal structure.
Why This Matters
BozokMedia analysis shows that this confrontation highlights a growing legal and political rift regarding the role of state governments in judicial appointments. While the judiciary operates independently, the consultation process involving state governments is a critical component of the constitutional balance, and any perceived bypass can lead to prolonged legal battles and political instability.
The tension between central notification and state consultation marks a pivotal moment for federalism in the Indian judicial appointment process.
Countering the state's allegations, India's Additional Solicitor General, Satya Pal Jain, described the Punjab government's objection as "most unfortunate and totally uncalled for." Jain asserted that the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended the name on August 6, and all other state governments had submitted their views within a week. He further clarified that state governments do not possess a "veto" power over such judicial appointments and warned against politicizing a non-political issue.
Historical Background: The appointment of High Court Chief Justices is governed by the Memorandum of Procedure. According to Para 6 of the MoP, after the Chief Justice of India makes a recommendation, the Union Minister of Law and Justice is expected to obtain the views of the concerned State Government before the proposal is submitted to the Prime Minister and subsequently to the President.
| Aspect | Punjab Government Position | Central Government Position |
|---|---|---|
| Procedure | Claiming a violation of the Memorandum of Procedure. | Asserting that states have no veto power. |
| Timeline | Views were not adequately addressed. | States had sufficient time to submit views. |
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why is the Punjab government protesting?
The government claims the Centre appointed the new Chief Justice without seeking or considering the state's views, violating constitutional norms.
2. What was the Centre's response?
The Centre stated that the state had ample time to respond and that the objection is an attempt to politicize a judicial process.
