{"id":7238,"date":"2015-07-02T12:07:00","date_gmt":"2015-07-02T12:07:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/sccblog\/?p=7238"},"modified":"2015-10-14T17:15:55","modified_gmt":"2015-10-14T11:45:55","slug":"developments-associated-with-the-njac","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/","title":{"rendered":"Developments associated with the NJAC"},"content":{"rendered":"<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, seeks to \u201cregulate the procedure to be followed by the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) for recommending persons for appointment as the Chief Justice of India and other Judges of the Supreme Court and Chief Justices and other Judges of High Courts and for their transfers and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto\u201d<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn1\" name=\"_ednref1\" title=\"\"><span><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >i<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/a>. The operation of the NJAC as the appointing body for higher judiciary, in effect, implies the displacement of the long-standing Collegium system: a unique manner of appointment whereby judges are appointed by the President, in consultation with a closed group comprising of the Chief Justice of India and four next most senior judges of the Supreme Court. The judiciary being responsible for- and, in fact, having a monopoly over- its own appointments is witnessed to be an unprecedented trend in present-day legal frameworks across polities, and it was in response to the criticism leveled against this Collegium system that the NJAC saw its emergence.<\/span><\/p>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">A prerequisite for the operation of the NJAC was the modification of constitutional provisions particularly Articles 124 and 217, so as to allow the incorporation of the altered appointment method without offending the Constitution. Consequently, an enabling legislation accompanied the NJAC Bill for the consideration of the Union Parliament, in the form of the Constitutional (One Hundred and Twenty-First Amendment) Bill, 2014, which went on to become the Constitutional (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014.<\/span><\/p>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">Article 124A, sought to be inserted by way of the 99<sup>th<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2014, lays down the composition of the said six-member NJAC: the Chief Justice of India as the <i>ex-officio <\/i>Chairperson, \u201ctwo other senior Judges of the Supreme Court next to the Chief Justice of India\u201d and the Union Minister in charge of Law and Justice being <i>ex-officio <\/i>members, accompanied by two eminent persons to be nominated by a committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of Opposition in the House of the People<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn2\" name=\"_ednref2\" title=\"\"><span><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >ii<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">Appointment associated with the NJAC Bill (and Act), largely extending to the challenge to its constitutional validity before a five-judge Supreme Court bench, can be comprehensively traced as follows<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn3\" name=\"_ednref3\" title=\"\"><span><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >iii<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/a>:<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p ><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp;August 2014<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><span lang=\"EN-US\"><span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Reference to constitutional bench:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> The NJAC Bill was passed by the Parliament and within the month, it was challenged in the Supreme Court, along with the 121<sup>st<\/sup> Constitutional Amendment Bill, on the ground that they violate the basic structure of the Constitution by infringing on judicial independence.&nbsp; In keeping with the contention of the petitioners and in light of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India, the three-judge bench led by Justice Anil Dave declared that \u201cw<span>e are of the view that these petitions involve substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India and therefore, we direct the Registry to place all the matters of this group before Hon&#8217;ble the Chief Justice of India so that they can be placed before a larger Bench for its consideration\u201d<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn4\" name=\"_ednref4\" title=\"\"><span><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >iv<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span lang=\"EN-US\"><span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Petition declared premature: <\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">A five-judge Constitutional Bench<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"> led by Justice A.R. Dave, by an order dated 25<sup>th<\/sup> August 2014, refused to entertain the petitions, observing that it is too \u201cpremature\u201d for the court to intervene as the 121st Constitution Amendment Bill was yet to be ratified by half the State Legislative Assemblies; until the Act comes into force, cause of action cannot be said to have arisen. However, the Bench also observed that the parties could move the Supreme Court on the same ground at an appropriate stage<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p ><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">December, 2014:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; Presidential approval: <\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">On 31<sup>st<\/sup> December 2014, the President granted his approval to the NJAC Bill, 2014 and the enabling 121<sup>st<\/sup> Constitution Amendment Bill.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p ><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">April 2015:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp;Alteration in Bench:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> Justice J.S. Khehar started to head the five-judge bench after Justice Dave recused himself from hearing the said proceedings, in acceptance of senior counsel Fali S. Nariman&#8217;s submission. Mr. Nariman raised the question of conflict of interest, stating that there persisted a conflict of interest and Justice Dave must decide whether he wanted to head the Constitutional Bench or be part of the NJAC. A similar preliminary objection as to whether Justice Khehar should preside over the Bench, given the fact that he is the fourth senior most judge and therefore part of the Collegium,&nbsp; was dismissed by unanimous opinion of the Bench<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn5\" name=\"_ednref5\" title=\"\"><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >v<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp;Re-appointment of existing additional judges:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> Emerging concerns over the effect that the pendency of proceedings may have over the functioning of courts led the Attorney General, Mukul Rohatgi, to declare that existing additional judges, whose terms are ending while the constitutional bench is hearing the case of the Commission&#8217;s validity, will be re-appointed or confirmed and no judge will lose his or her job because of the new system of judicial appointments. Further, the Centre assured the Supreme Court that no fresh appointments of High Court and Supreme Court judges will be made until the question of validity of the NJAC is decided upon.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; Submissions of petitioners challenging the NJAC:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> On 27<sup>th<\/sup> April 2015, the hearing of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the NJAC Act commenced. Senior counsel Fali S. Nariman contended along several lines of argument:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p   ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >\u2022<span>&nbsp; &nbsp;<\/span><\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">the validity of new law on appointment of judges cannot be sustained as it violates the basic structure of the Constitution;<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >\u2022<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">no &#8220;weightage or primacy&#8221; has been given to the views of the Chief Justice of India in selection of judges;<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >\u2022<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">referring to the constitution of the six-member panel, he said, who will decide if the panel gets divided vertically on the question of appointment of a judge;<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >\u2022<span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <\/span><\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">a Chief Justice of a High Court is not a participant of the NJAC but can only send his recommendation to the NJAC;<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >\u2022<span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &#8220;<\/span><\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">preponderance\u201d of views of three senior most judges of the apex court, as recommended by the Justice Venkatachaliah panel, has not been not provided for by the NJAC Act.<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">Nariman was supported by Anil Divan, the mainstay of whose argument extended to the submission that \u201cthe manner in which it (NJAC) has been constituted, the Act has altered the basic structure of the Constitution\u201d.<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">Further supplementing these arguments, senior advocate Arvind P. Datar questioned the Central Government&#8217;s intention by pointing out that no criteria had been stipulated to determine the inclusion of&nbsp; \u201ceminent personalities\u201d in the NJAC.<\/span><\/p>\n<p >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Reference to higher bench refused:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> The Supreme Court decided that for determining the constitutionality of the NJAC, it will not make a reference to its nine-judge bench or eleven-judge bench. The Attorney General, Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, had been attempting to maintain that if the Court was relying on the nine-judge bench judgment of the year 1998 (<i>In re Special Reference 1<\/i>) or the seven-judge bench judgment of 1993 (<i>Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association<\/i> v. <i>Union of India<\/i>), both of which formalised the Collegium system, then the present petitions are to be referred to a Bench of nine or eleven judges.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span lang=\"EN-US\"><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Impact of NJAC:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> The ongoing proceedings progressed to a deliberation as to the effect that the NJAC Act may have on the working of the judiciary in India, with the Bench expressing a critical view of the proposed method of judicial appointment. It posed questions as regards the working of the NJAC, with particular emphasis on the manner, if any, in which it would make judicial functioning more \u201cmeaningful and accountable\u201d. The reference made by the Bench pertained directly to the Statement of Objects and Reasons in the NJAC Act, 2014: \u201cThe said Commission would provide a meaningful role for the judiciary, the executive and eminent persons to present their view points and make the participants accountable, while also introducing transparency in the selection process.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">Further, in response to the provision in the Act pertaining to the nomination of two eminent persons by a three-member panel of the Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition or the leader of the largest opposition party and Chief Justice of India, the bench tersely observed how two politicians, with the Chief Justice of India \u201csandwiched\u201d between them, decide on two laymen interfering in judicial appointments.<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; Merit of the Collegium system:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> The focus of the hearing moved onto a weighing of the merit of the Collegium system as a method of appointment of judges. Justice Khehar, on behalf of the Bench, remarked that the Collegium system worked well, conceding that it may have been in need of improvement, the observation having been made in response to Mr. Ram Jethmalani&#8217;s submission stating that the sole grievance against the Collegium system was the lack of transparency. The Bench persisted, categorically declaring that \u201cWe only select the best lawyer who can be appointed as a judge. His morality, integrity and behaviour in society are all considered&#8230; Tell us one instance where our recommendation has proved wrong.\u201d. Further, reacting to Mr Jethmalani&#8217;s suggestion that the system should have included the procedure of advertising for judges&#8217; posts, Justice Khekhar said, \u201cEven without advertisements, we receive thousands of letters&#8230; If we advertise, it will create more problems\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">In pursuance of these submissions, the court directed the Centre to submit statistics which can throw some light on the complaints against the collegium system: In how many cases the Centre raised objections after the Supreme Court and the High Court collegium cleared names for judges&#8217; appointment; in how many cases the appointments were reiterated despite the Centre&#8217;s objections; and in how many cases those persons were not appointed.<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp;Rejection of plea for re-consideration of 1993 judgment: <\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Supreme Court discarded the Attorney General&#8217;s attempts to bring the Bench to reconsider the 1993 judgment that ushered in the Collegium system, citing it to be an irrelevant consideration at this stage. \u201cIf you are successful in showing to us that the interpretation of the nine-judge giving primacy to the CJI is wrong, you still don&#8217;t succeed unless you succeed in showing that the present (NJAC) system does not undermine or impinge upon the independence of judiciary,\u201d observed the Bench.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p   ><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Attorney General submitted that the primacy of the CJI in appointment of judges will be detrimental to the consultative process.<\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\"> The Bench remarked that the \u201cgovernment was the first one to agree about judicial primacy. You can&#8217;t change your position everyday. What is the compulsion now to change your stand&#8230; are you saying we were wrong in 1993?\u201d <\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">and rejected the argument by stating that the President will continue to rely on others outside of the Collegium. Further, the Bench maintained that even the Collegium itself did not impinge upon the checks and balances envisaged in the Constitution.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><span lang=\"EN-US\"><span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Concern as to administration of judiciary: <\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Bench clarified that the matter before it, relating to the challenge to the NJAC Act, can be referred to a larger bench at a later stage, if required; however, rejecting the Centre&#8217;s plea of immediate reference, the Bench decided to go into the merits of the issue beginning June 8<sup>th<\/sup>. Further, as an interim measure, the Bench directed the continuance in office of additional High Court judges, whose present stint is due to end in near future,&nbsp; for three months. Further, in view of the need for imminent disposal of the matter at hand, the Bench declared that it would continue with the hearing on the merits of the matter and allotted definite time frames for parties to conclude the arguments: \u201cIf a couple of months are taken to complete the matter, there will be high courts with acting chief justices. The administration of judiciary is also important. For four to five months, we cannot keep the judiciary in freezer\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p   ><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">June 2015:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"><o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; Bench discarded NJAC as \u201ctrial and error\u201d:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Bench termed the appointment of judges to the higher judiciary to be \u201cserious business\u201d that was neither a \u201chit-and-trial business\u201d nor could be left to God. In response, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi submitted that \u201chit-and-trial is part of Constitutional evolution. NJAC should be given a try. It is better then the previous models\u201d, referring to the Collegium as being an embodiment of \u201cyou scratch my back, I will scratch yours\u201d. He further put forth that \u201cunder the Constitution, the power was vested with the Executive. Then under the Collegium system judges started appointing judges in consultation with the Executive. Now the third model has to be tested independently. It is a healthy mix\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; Bench condemns excessive transparency:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> A further reservation of the Supreme Court, as regards the NJAC, came to light with its condemnation of excessive transparency in the new appointment system envisaged by the NJAC. Anticipating its detrimental impact on the appointment method, the Bench declared that \u201cthe effect of transparency is no one will give honest adverse report as it will be put to public domain under the Right to Information (RTI). What is the point in transparency if you can&#8217;t give honest opinion about the candidate? If a lawyer is not selected and loses judgeship, and if his non-selection is to be subject matter of RTI, his profession will be ruined. Even if he becomes a judge and later on if the adverse comments are put in public domain it will lead to disastrous consequences for him.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Eminent persons:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> Another pertinent issue came to the fore as the Court questioned the complete absence of provisions in the NJAC Act 2014 as regards the removal of two eminent persons from the six-member NJAC and sought to know, from the Government, whether there was any scope for judicial review of their selection.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p   ><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Attorney General put forth the Centre&#8217;s stand by conveying that the Parliament, in discharge of its functions, may make such law or rules as may prescribe the procedure for the same. Referring to provisions in the General Clauses Act, he added, \u201cWhoever appoints a person, can remove him. In this case, the troika (the PM, CJI and Leader of Opposition) has the discretion. It should be left to its discretion&#8230;All this is in the realm of academic discussion. It NJAC has not started working. Even rules have not been framed\u201d.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<p   >\n<ul>\n<li><span lang=\"EN-US\"><span>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">Revival of Collegium system:<\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\"> Speculating the potential impact in the event of conclusion of the ongoing proceedings against the validity of the NJAC, the Bench observed that the Collegium system of appointing judges to the higher judiciary would stand revived if it struck down the NJAC Act and the associated 99<sup>th <\/sup>Constitutional Amendment Act. This remark lay in rejection of Solicitor General&nbsp; Ranjit Kumar\u2019s contention that the Court had no power to revive the all-judges Collegium, scrapped by Parliament.&nbsp; It was his proposition that if the Bench quashed the NJAC Act and the amendment, there would be a \u201chiatus or vacuum,\u201d necessitating Parliament\u2019s intervention to enact a new law for the appointment of judges. Reviving the Collegium would amount to legislation, which was in the jurisdiction of Parliament, not the Supreme Court. The government maintained its stand to the effect that <\/span><span lang=\"EN-US\">the collegium system is \u201cdead and buried forever\u201d and it cannot be revived even if the Constitution Bench quashes the proposed NJAC.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b><span lang=\"EN-US\">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Debate in State Assemblies: <\/span><\/b><span lang=\"EN-US\">The constitutional Bench, headed by Justice J.S. Khehar, voiced skepticism as the Centre and Gujarat said that the NJAC was the \u201cwill of the people\u201d and a product of unanimous public and legislative support. Rebutting the government&#8217;s submissions stating that 20 State Assemblies have ratified the Constitutional Amendment and that the \u201cwhole nation\u201d wanted the NJAC, the bench challenged the government: \u201cWas there any debate in the Gujarat Assembly or you just passed it without discussion?\u201d It is pertinent to note that the judiciary stands prohibited, by constitutional mandate, from inquiring into such proceedings: the validity of any proceedings in the legislature of a State shall not be called in question on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure<a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_edn6\" name=\"_ednref6\" title=\"\"><span><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >vi<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>, deliberation as to a bill (and the extent thereof) falling within the ambit of the&nbsp; term \u201cprocedure\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p ><span lang=\"EN-US\">The proceedings as regard the constitutionality of the NJAC are ongoing before the said five-judge bench, the central question being that of independence of the judiciary vis-a-vis a balanced role of the executive and the judiciary in making judicial appointments.<\/span><\/p>\n<div>\n<hr align=\"left\" size=\"1\" width=\"33%\">  <!--endif-->  <\/p>\n<div id=\"edn1\">\n<p ><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref1\" name=\"_edn1\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >i<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014; Available at: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.indiacode.nic.in\/acts2014\/40_of_2014.pdf\"><span>http:\/\/www.indiacode.nic.in\/acts2014\/40_of_2014.pdf<\/span><\/a>. Last accessed: 30. 06. 2015.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"edn2\">\n<p ><!--if !supportLists--><span lang=\"EN-US\">1.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <\/span><\/span><!--endif--><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref2\" name=\"_edn2\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >ii<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">The Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014; Available at: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.egazette.nic.in\/WriteReadData\/2014\/162235.pdf\"><span>http:\/\/www.egazette.nic.in\/WriteReadData\/2014\/162235.pdf<\/span><\/a>. Last accessed: 30.06.2015.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"edn3\">\n<p ><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref3\" name=\"_edn3\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >iii<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">Sources include: The Hindu, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ndtv.in\/\"><span>www.ndtv.in<\/span><\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dnaindia.in\/\"><span>www.dnaindia.in<\/span><\/a>, The Tribune, the Economic Times and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.indianexpress.com\/\"><span>www.indianexpress.com<\/span><\/a>.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"edn4\">\n<p ><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref4\" name=\"_edn4\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >iv<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">2015&nbsp; SCC OnLine SC 388.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"edn5\">\n<p ><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref5\" name=\"_edn5\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >v<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">2015&nbsp; SCC OnLine SC 388.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"edn6\">\n<p ><a href=\"file:\/\/\/I:\/Vrinda%20Pareek\/NJAC\/NJAC%20Developments%20Revised.odt#_ednref6\" name=\"_edn6\" title=\"\"><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"><!--if !supportFootnotes--><span><span lang=\"EN-US\"  >vi<\/span><\/span><!--endif--><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\">Article 122 and 212, Constitution of India.<o:p><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, seeks to \u201cregulate the procedure to be followed by the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":7321,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1188],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7238","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hot_off_the_press"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Developments associated with the NJAC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Developments associated with the NJAC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, seeks to \u201cregulate the procedure to be followed by the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-07-02T12:07:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-14T11:45:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/\",\"name\":\"Developments associated with the NJAC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-07-02T12:07:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-14T11:45:55+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Developments associated with the NJAC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Developments associated with the NJAC | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Developments associated with the NJAC","og_description":"The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, seeks to \u201cregulate the procedure to be followed by the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2015-07-02T12:07:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-14T11:45:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/","name":"Developments associated with the NJAC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","datePublished":"2015-07-02T12:07:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-14T11:45:55+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/02\/developments-associated-with-the-njac\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Developments associated with the NJAC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":7176,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/04\/15\/the-national-judicial-appointments-commission-act-2014-and-the-constitution-ninety-ninth-amendment-act-2014-notified-collegium-system-of-appointing-judges-comes-to-an-end\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":0},"title":"The National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 and the Constitution (Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 notified, collegium system of appointing judges comes to an end","author":"Sucheta","date":"April 15, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"On 13.04.2015, the Ministry of Law and Justice notified the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 (NJAC Act) and the Constitution (Ninety Ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 for bringing in a change in the existing system for appointment of Judges in Supreme Court and High Courts. The NJAC Act provides for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legislation Updates&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":21325,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/10\/17\/constitution-ninety-ninth-amendment-act-and-the-njac-act-declared-as-unconstitutional\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":1},"title":"Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act and the NJAC Act declared as unconstitutional","author":"Sucheta","date":"October 17, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A major breakthrough was achieved in the controversy surrounding the validity of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) when the Constitution Bench comprising of J.S. Khehar, M.B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph, A.K. Goel and J. Chelameshwar, JJ., with a ratio of 4:1 declared the 99th Amendment to the Constitution\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":21329,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/10\/16\/njac-act-and-constitution-ninety-ninth-amendment-act-declared-unconstitutional-by-5-judge-bench\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":2},"title":"NJAC Act and Constitution (Ninety-Ninth Amendment) Act declared unconstitutional by 5-Judge bench","author":"Sucheta","date":"October 16, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Justices J. S. Khehar, J. Chelameswar, Madan B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Adarsh Kumar Goel, pronounced the separate judgments and the prayer for reference to a larger Bench, and for reconsideration of the Second and Third Judges cases [(1993) 4 SCC 441, and (1998) 7 SCC 739, respectively]\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":275626,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/26\/appointment-of-supreme-court-and-high-court-judges-need-for-a-fresh-look\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":3},"title":"Appointment of Supreme Court and High Court Judges: Need for a Fresh Look","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Vijay Hansaria\u2020","rel":"","context":"In &quot;OP. ED.&quot;","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-139-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-139-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-139-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-139-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-139-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":220118,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/27\/bombay-bar-association-strongly-disapproves-collegiums-manner-of-decision-making-pertaining-to-the-elevation-of-justice-a-a-kureshi\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":4},"title":"Bombay Bar Association strongly disapproves Collegium&#8217;s manner of decision-making pertaining to the elevation of Justice A. A. Kureshi","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"In view of decisions of the Supreme Court of India starting from First Judge\u2019s case (S.P.Gupta v. Union of India, 1981 Supp SCC 87), Second Judge\u2019s case: Supreme Court Advocates On Record Association v. Union of India\u00a0 (1993) 4 SCC 441; Third Judge\u2019s Case : Re Special Reference No. 1\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/BBA.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/BBA.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/BBA.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/BBA.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/BBA.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246319,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/01\/first-woman-chief-justice-of-supreme-court-of-india\/","url_meta":{"origin":7238,"position":5},"title":"In search of the first woman Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India","author":"Editor","date":"April 1, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Dr Lokendra Malik*","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Supreme-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Supreme-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Supreme-Court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Supreme-Court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Supreme-Court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7238","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7238"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7238\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7321"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7238"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7238"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7238"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}