A bench of justices Altamas Kabir, J Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi initially wanted to outrightly dismiss the plea for quashing Justice Bhandari's nomination for ICJ, but later allowed counsel Prashant Bhushan to withdraw it, treating it as "dismissed as withdrawn".
Appearing for the petitioner, a post-graduate law student, Bhushan argued that Justice Bhandari's nomination should not be permitted as it compromised the judiciary's independence.
Asked as to how the independence of the judiciary was compromised due to the nomination of the apex court judge, Bhushan told the bench that Justice Bhandari was a sitting Supreme Court judge and the Government of India, which is a litigant before the apex court in several cases, has been lobbying for his nomination at various international fora.
The bench also questioned the petitioner's locus standi and wondered if there was any public interest involved in the issue.
"What is the interest of public? He (petitioner) is not a contender so what is the public interest involved here," the bench asked.
Bhushan, however, persisted with his argument and cited the nine-judge constitution bench ruling in the Advocate-on- Record Association case, wherein it was ruled that appointment to the judiciary shall not be influenced by any executive interference.
