Case Analysis: Supreme Court Advocates On Record Association Vs. Union Of India

Nandini Tandon, Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur

ABSTRACT

This article is a case commentary on the famous case of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs. Union of India, also known as the NJAC case, which deals with the topic of judicial review. This case is a classic example of overreach by the judiciary under the garb of judicial activism. This case commentary presents a brief account of the facts of the case and the relevant issue at hand and then presents an analysis of the same.

INTRODUCTION

Facts

The facts of the case are such that the validity of the Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 (NJAC Act) were challenged on the grounds of taking away the powers of the judiciary to appoint judges as the main aim of these Acts was to put an end to the collegium system for appointing judges in the higher judiciary. The 99th Amendment Act along with the NJAC Act had sought to start a new way of appointing judges with the help of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).

This Commission was set up with a view of drafting a process through which judges can be selected, appointed and transferred. The NJAC was to be a high level commission and was to make recommendations for “appointment of judges of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of a High Court, and matters related to transfer of cases from one High Court to another, etc. The constitution of the NJAC was to be constituted by the Chief Justice of India and two senior most judges of the Supreme Court of India along with the Union Minister of Law and Justice and two eminent members. This NJAC was seeking to do away with the existing system of collegium.”