T.Chiranjeevulu, IAS Ret
The three important pillars of democracy are the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary. An independent judiciary is the backbone for the protection of democracy. The primary functions of the judiciary include maintaining the rule of law, protecting the fundamental rights of citizens, and upholding the Constitution.
What is the role and share (Isaa entha?) of the Bahujan population, who constitute over 85% of this country, in such a crucial judiciary? Is the participation of the Bahujan necessary in judicial administration or not?
From the time of the independence movement until today, the dominance of the forward castes/upper classes has continued in the legal profession. Even among advocates, the dominance belongs to the upper castes/classes. In this field, equal opportunities and social justice are not reaching the majority population of the country.
Even though reservations are implemented in the Subordinate Courts/District Courts, the lack of reservation in the appointments of judges to the key higher judicial bodies—the High Courts and the Supreme Court—has reduced the role of the Bahujan in this sector to a mere formality. They are forced to seek justice from a system primarily controlled by the forward castes and have not yet reached the stage of issuing judicial orders. They continue to be crushed under the ancient clutches of the caste system, which is thousands of years old. These are not merely jobs; they are symbols of our self-respect, constitutional positions that instill self-confidence in us, and benchmarks for our social status.
Considering the necessity of an independent judiciary, the framers of the Constitution left the appointments of judges to the judiciary itself. The Supreme Court established the rules for the appointment of its judges.
For the appointment of High Court judges, there is a committee consisting of the Chief Justice of the High Court and two other senior judges. This committee selects candidates equal to the number of vacancies and sends its recommendations to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Collegium examines and approves these recommendations, which are then sent through the Prime Minister for the President's approval. The Central Law Ministry then issues the notification for their appointment as judges with the President's consent. Similarly, Supreme Court judges are selected by the Collegium of five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court and appointed through the President's approval. The Collegium is entirely composed of judges.
The state and central governments have no role in this selection process. If the central or state governments have any remarks on the Collegium's recommendations, they can send their opinion, with the help of intelligence reports, back to the Collegium. However, the Collegium's recommendations are final. This means that in the judiciary, the judges are supreme; they appoint their own judges.
While this process is said to strengthen the independence of the judiciary, in reality, criticisms are rampant that judges are appointing their relatives over merit. It is alleged that upper-caste/class judges play a primary role, and the judiciary has become captive to a few families. The term "Uncle Judges" has become common.
Examining the share of representation for Backward Classes (BCs), Scheduled Castes (SCs), and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in this entire selection process reveals how social justice is being implemented in this country. The truth is that without representation from these classes, their appointments will not happen. That is why reservation must be implemented in the appointment of judges in the judiciary. The following statistics illustrate why this is necessary:
1. Supreme Court Judges (1950–2022) - From Hyderabad State, Telangana, and United Andhra Pradesh High Courts: Out of 16 judges promoted to the Supreme Court:
Reddys: 7
Kammas: 3
Brahmins: 2
Velamas: 1
Raju: 1
Muslim: 1
Scheduled Castes (SC): 1
BCs or STs: Zero candidates.
2. Chief Justices of High Court (Hyderabad State, United Andhra Pradesh, Telangana) - Total 42:
OC (Forward Castes): 39
Brahmins: 13
Reddys: 5
Baniyas: 5
Kayastha: 3
Velama/Raju/Rajput: 3
Kamma: 2
Muslims: 2
Punjabis: 2
Maheswari: 1
Nair: 1
Maratha: 1
Christian: 1
Backward Classes (BCs): 3 (One from Kerala, one from Tamil Nadu, and one Telugu person, Justice Sri Komaraiah Garu).
Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST): Zero.
3. High Court Judges (1950–2022) - Total 204:
Brahmins: 50
Reddys: 37
Kammas: 21
Kshatriyas (Velama/Raju/Rajput): 14
Muslims: 14
Kapu: 11
Baniya: 7
Kayastha: 2
Nair: 2
Patnaik: 1
BCs: 32
Scheduled Castes (SC): 7
Scheduled Tribes (ST): 2
OC (Caste Unknown): 4
If you carefully observe the above figures, the total representation of BC, SC, and ST (excluding Muslims), who make up 80% of the population, is 41, while the Brahmin community alone (less than 1% in Telangana) has 50 judges. (Source: Retired Justice Eswaraiah Garu)
Data from the Central Government (Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, December 13, 2024): According to the answer given by Shri Arjun Ram Meghwal, Union Minister of State for Law and Justice, to Unstarred Question 3117, a total of 684 High Court judges were appointed from 2018 to December 9, 2024. Among them:
General: 530 (77.48%)
OBC: 82 (11.98%)
SC: 21 (3.07%)
ST: 14 (2.04%)
Minority: 34 (4.97%)
Similarly, regarding women judges in the Supreme Court, out of 246 judges appointed in the last 72 years (up to 2022), only 8 were women.
This is the state of social justice implemented in the country's judicial system. That is why there is a strong argument that BCs do not receive justice in many case verdicts. The Supreme Court's own judgment on EWS reservation has been criticized by retired Supreme Court judges.
Soon after independence, there may have been a scarcity of qualified candidates from the BC, SC, and ST communities due to low education levels. However, today, there are qualified and deserving candidates from the BC, SC, and ST communities in every respect.
Justice Mathew, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, opined that the judiciary also falls under the definition of "State" in Article 12 of the Constitution. This view was later supported by Justice Hidayatullah and other judges in subsequent judgments. Since the judiciary is part of the State, there is a strong opinion that constitutional amendments must be made to implement reservations for Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Women in the judiciary.
Shri Wilson, Rajya Sabha member from Tamil Nadu, introduced the Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2024, in Parliament on February 15, 2025, where he elaborated on the necessity of implementing reservations in the judiciary.
The Central Government and the Supreme Court must now establish a reservation system to ensure equal representation for all sections of society. Furthermore, judicial appointments at all levels should be made through an independent Judicial Commission. Otherwise, social justice in the judiciary will remain an elusive goal for the marginalized majority classes. Fair justice and equal opportunities will be meaningless.
The children of the Bahujan, the original inhabitants of this country, must fight for their rightful share in this sector as well. They must remember the saying: "Even your mother will not feed you unless you ask."
Comments
Post a Comment