A dissent to safeguard the future

The opposition against the proposal of the Supreme Court judge BV Nagarathna to raise the justice Vipul Manubhai Pancholi to the upper court was an objection to maintain the future of the court and the reliability of the college judicial appointment system.

In his note, Justice Nagarathna called on India’s Chief Justice (CJI) to keep in mind that the decisions taken today will have consequences on the administration of future justice. The opposition has drawn the power of the court that the judicial appointments should not be afraid of other power centers. As Justice Madan B. Lokur wrote in the decision of the National Judiciary Appointments Commission, the executive intervention in judicial appointments would injure the Justice Administration, because the government was “shamelessly the country’s largest case”.

The opposition suggested that the judges who may be the chief candidates of India, while the judiciary should be identified as “really high” because they have become the protectors of the independence of future generations. On August 29, the Supreme Court swear as a judge of Justice Pancholi, 2031 will be the CJI.

Lonely sound

Only the opposition from the judge of the Supreme Court of Women is versatile. Only Justice did not focus on Pancholi on the point where other women with senior women were judges. The reservations emphasized the criteria that the college should consider when evaluating a island for height. A college decision on 11 July 2024 listed them as criteria for judges who were taken into consideration – as shown by judgments written by judges and performance; integrity; The need to provide diversity for the region, gender and society; And the need to include marginalized and back segments of the community.

The train of the events that went to the 4: 1 section in Collegium reached until May 25, 2025 when the Chief Justice Gavai’s nomination of Justice Pancholi nominations. Justice is said to express Nagarathna’s oral opposition. Formerly the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Gujarat, Justice Vikram Nath appeared to object to the proposal. Justice Pancholi’s senior Justice Anjaria was suggested the next day at the Gujarat Supreme Court. In May 2025, Justice Anjaria fulfilled both seniority and regional representation criteria. However, the proposal to raise Pancholi, the chief justice of Patna since July 21 this year, reappeared in August. This time, Justice Nagarathna’s CJI and other college colleagues in July 2023, Pancholi’yi Patna Supreme Court of Patna Supreme Court in a written opposition to the Supreme Court reportedly a written opposition. Aravind gambling.

Justice Nagarathna asked the college to call and examine the minutes of the meeting, which proposes the transfer in 2023. Why a lawyer’s delegation asked India’s chief justice, Justice Dy Chandrachud (now retired) in the presence of the Shah of Justice and asked for the transfer. Justice Nagarathna was the reasons that led Justice Nath to condemn Justice Pancholi, and the first was the justice of the Gujarat Supreme Court.

Productive against justice

In his opposition, the judge of the Supreme Court said that the opinion of the Justice Pardiwala (the former Gujurat Supreme Court judge) did not meet for the proposal to raise Justice Pancholi as a justice of Patna Supreme Court Chief. In a section of a 41 -page document entitled ‘Appointment of Supreme Court judges’ by the Supreme Court, the first principle has a section called “India’s Chief Justice, the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court, which speaks with the Supreme Court of affairs”.

It has been reported that the Justice Pancholi, who ranks 57th in the entire Indian severance, said that the Supreme Court would be “productive against justice and risk the reliability of the college. Justice Nagarathna, which had India’s first female chief justice in 2027, has created doubts about whether the possible chief fair of Justice Pancholi would benefit the institution from October 3, 2031 to 27 May 2033.

Justice Nagarathna also asked if there was already a need on the Supreme Council with Justice Pardiwala and Justice Anjaria, who worked for a third judge of the Gujarat Supreme Court for the Chief Justice Chief. He raised the point that several high courts were represented or represented in the upper court. Among the highly high courts are Jammu and Kashmir, Orissa, Jharkhand, Cijah, Meghala, Tripura and Uttarakhand. It is said that the opposition grade claims that the senior senior judges of the Justice Pancholi, which Collegium can propose for the upper court, are several valuable judges.