Suitability of a candidate cleared by Collegium can’t be subject of judicial review: SC

Recently, the Supreme Court explained that the “suitability” of a candidate cleared by the Collegium for appointment as a judge in a constitutional court cannot be a subject of judicial review.

What’s the matter?

• The Supreme Court Collegium recently recommended the name Lakshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri to be appointed as a judge of the Madras High Court.
  • This came amidst ongoing tension between the Centre and the Collegium over constant delays in the Centre clearing names recommended by the Collegium. 
• Protest: Soon after Advocate gowri's name was recommended, lawyers at the Madras High Court began protesting against her appointment due to:
  • Hate speech: her past public speeches hint at strong prejudices against citizens on grounds of their religious affiliations.

Why Ms Gowri’s appointment is outside the ambit of ‘judicial review’?

• The court said the question of whether Ms Gowri was “fit” to be a judge was outside the ambit of judicial review.
• The question of whether a person is fit to be appointed as a judge essentially involves the aspect of suitability and stands excluded from the purview of judicial review.

Suitability vs Eligibility

• The Bench distinguished between the ‘suitability’ and ‘eligibility’ of a candidate zeroed in for a High Court judgeship.
• Eligibility was based on “objective factors” given in Article 217(2) of the Constitution.
• The suitability of a candidate was the domain of the Collegium as it involved a procedure “designed to test the fitness of a person, including her character, integrity, competence, knowledge and the like”.