SC Collegium recommends three lawyers for appointment as Bombay HC judges

New Delhi [India], May 3 (ANI): The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended the names of three advocates for appointment as judges of the Bombay High Court.

The Collegium, headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, proposed the names of lawyers Shailesh Pramod Brahme, Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla and Jitendra Shantilal Jain for the appointment. The Collegium, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph passed the resolution for appointment of three judges to the Bombay High Court on Tuesday.

On September 26, 2022, the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court made the recommendations in consultation with his two seniormost colleagues and the file was forwarded by the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court on April 26, 2023, the top court Collegium said.

The resolution stated, “The Chief Ministers and Governors of the States of Maharashtra and Goa have concurred with the recommendation. In terms of the memorandum of procedure, with a view to ascertaining the fitness and suitability of the candidates for elevation to the High Court, judges of the Supreme Court conversant with the affairs of the High Court of Bombay were consulted.”

The Collegium has scrutinised and evaluated the material placed on record for the purpose of assessing the merit and suitability of the candidates for elevation to the High Court.

It said, “In view of the above, the Collegium resolves to recommend that Shailesh Pramod Brahme, Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla and Jitendra Shantilal Jain, advocates, be appointed as judges of the High Court of Bombay. Their inter se seniority be fixed as per the existing practice.”

In the resolution, the Collegium stated that with regard to Pooniwalla’s name, the consultee-judges have opined that he is suitable for elevation and the Intelligence Bureau has stated in its report that he has a good personal and professional image and that nothing adverse has come to notice regarding his integrity and that he is not associated with any political party.

“The Intelligence Bureau has, however, flagged that Pooniwalla had earlier worked under an advocate. It is reported that the said advocate has written an article in a publication in 2020 expressing concerns over the alleged lack of freedom of speech/expression in the country in the last five-six years. The views expressed by a former senior of Pooniwalla have no bearing on his own competence, ability or credentials for appointment as a judge of the High Court of Bombay. Moreover, the collegium notes that Pooniwalla and his former senior practise on the original side of the High Court of Bombay,” it said.

The Collegium said the junior counsel associated with the chamber of a senior on the original side is not engaged in a relationship of employer-employee with their senior.

It added, “While juniors are associated with the chamber, they are free to do their own work and for all the intents and purposes, are entitled to independent legal practice. No adverse comments reflecting on the suitability of the candidate for elevation have been made in the file. The candidate has extensive practice at the Bar and is specialised in commercial law.”

The Collegium further said that Pooniwalla belongs to a minority community and keeping in mind overall consideration, he is suitable for appointment as a judge if the High Court.

“The candidate professes Parsi Zoroastrianism and belongs to a minority community. Keeping in mind the above aspects and on an overall consideration of the proposal for his elevation, the Collegium is of the considered opinion that Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla is suitable for appointment as a judge of the High Court of Bombay,” it added.

In another resolution, the Collegium recommended the name of Additional Judge Robin Phukan for appointment as a permanent judge of the Gauhati High Court.

“The Chief Ministers of the states of Assam, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh and the Governors of the states of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh have concurred with the recommendation. We have considered the view of the judges of the Supreme Court conversant with the affairs of the Gauhati High Court who were consulted, in terms of the memorandum of procedure, with a view to ascertaining the fitness and suitability of Justice Robin Phukan for being appointed as a permanent judge,” the Collegium stated.