The PIL by the Madras High Court Advocates Association has sought the return of the list sent by the collegium of the high court and wanted it to be redone on grounds including "arbitrariness" in the process of selection and that it had ignored eligible candidates from 'un-represented' and 'under- represented' communities.
When the matter came up today before a bench comprising Justice V Ramasubramanian and Justice P R Shivakumar, counsel for petitioner, Muthuramalingam, raised objections to its hearing by the bench on the grounds that since some specific points raised in the petition pertained to appointment of Brahmin judges, it should not be heard by a bench headed by a judge from the community.
Muthuramalingam then submitted that the office-bearers of the association were in New Delhi and sought adjournment of the hearing. Accepting this, the bench posted the hearing for next week.
In the PIL, petitioner S Arivazhagan, Secretary of MHAA, submitted that though the concept of social justice and accommodating persons from various classes and assuring them of a seat in the high court cannot be adjudicated very easily, there is arbitrariness in the process of selection where it refuses to adopt the rule of reservation.
