Never practiced and became HC judge, SC cancelled appointment, know the unique case of judiciary
The Supreme Court put an end to the ongoing controversy in the L. Victoria Gauri case by refusing to interfere with the decision of its own collegium. But in the post-independence era, there is also a unique case in which the Supreme Court had put scissors to the appointment of a High Court judge. This matter came to light in 1992. The Supreme Court said in its decision that this is happening for the first time after independence when the appointment of a judge had to be considered.
In the year 1992, one KN Srivastava was appointed as a judge of the Gauhati High Court. But he had to be ashamed even before taking the oath. In fact, he was elevated as a judge of the Gauhati High Court. Consent was also received from the President of India. But at the same time the section was objected by the Bar to the appointment of KN Srivastava. The bar said that Srivastava never practiced law. It is clearly stated in Article 217 of the constitution that to become a High Court judge, it is very important to practice law. Bar said that Srivastava was posted as Secretary in the Law Department of Mizoram Government.
On a lawyer's petition, the High Court heard the matter and found that KN Srivastava did not meet the criteria to become a High Court judge. The High Court passed an order that the appointment warrant of the President should not be implemented. The High Court asked the government to look into Srivastava's appointment. After this the matter was handed over to the Supreme Court.
During the hearing of the case, the Supreme Court said that it is a very shameful situation that it is considering the scale of appointment of a High Court judge. The top court said that post-independence, such a situation has never happened that on one the hand a person is waiting to enter the High Court, while on the other hand, his merit is being considered.
However, there were also allegations of corruption and misappropriation of funds against Srivastava. But the Supreme Court did not consider them. The apex court only looked into the aspect of "whether he was eligible to be a High Court judge or not". A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court said that under Article 217 (2) (a) of the Constitution, it is necessary to practice law to become a High Court judge. But the position Srivastava held in the law department of the Mizoram government did not come under the purview of the judiciary. He was only a part of the executive.
Justice Kuldeep Singh, Justice PB Sawant, Justice NM Kasliwal's bench did not find KN Srivastava fit to be a High Court judge. The three-judge bench clearly said in its decision that Srivastava is not fit to be a High Court judge on the merit scale. Citing Article 219 of the Constitution, the bench ordered the government to prevent Srivastava from taking oath as a High Court judge. The special thing is that even after the appointment warrant was issued by the President in this case, Srivastava was prevented from taking oath as a High Court judge.