Case Summary: Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association vs Union of India
Citation: (2015) 10 SC CK 0160 | (2016) 5 SCC 808
Case No: Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 13, 14, 18, 23, 24, 70, 83, 108, 124, 209, 309, 310, 323, 341 of 2015 & TP(C) Nos. 391, 971 of 2015
Date of Decision: 16 October 2015
Bench: Hon'ble Justices J.S. Khehar, Jasti Chelameswar, Madan B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph, A.K. Goel
Final Decision: National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) struck down as unconstitutional
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=997368
Law Points Raised:
- Constitutional validity of 99th Amendment and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 (NJAC Act).
- Basic structure doctrine – whether the NJAC violates judicial independence.
- Articles 124 and 217 – procedure for appointment of judges.
- Article 50 – separation of powers and independence of judiciary.
- Judicial primacy in appointments as derived from the Second and Third Judges cases.
Ratio Decidendi:
- The independence of the judiciary is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be altered even by a constitutional amendment.
- The NJAC, by giving veto powers to non-judicial members and including the Law Minister in the selection panel, compromised judicial independence.
- Judicial primacy in appointments and transfers is essential to maintain judicial independence.
- The 99th Constitutional Amendment and NJAC Act violate this essential feature and are thus unconstitutional.
Final Ruling:
- The 99th Constitutional Amendment and the NJAC Act, 2014 were struck down as unconstitutional.
- The collegium system for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts was restored.
Relevant Paragraph Highlights:
- Para 60–100 (Reference Order): Detailed consideration of arguments for and against NJAC.
- Para 133–245 (Order on Merits): Core judicial reasoning, deliberations on the independence of judiciary.
- Para 246–256: Effect of striking down NJAC and restoring the previous collegium system.
Conclusion:
This is one of the most significant post-Kesavananda Bharati rulings on constitutional amendments and the basic structure doctrine. The Supreme Court held that the NJAC mechanism undermined the independence of the judiciary, and hence violated the basic structure of the Constitution, reaffirming the primacy of the judiciary in appointing judges.