- (1.) This writ petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by the present petitioner claiming itself to be the registered Trust under the provisions of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. It has been established in the legal arena for the larger public interest. The Trust's motto is to challenge those provisions of law which are ultra virus and unconstitutional. Basically the petitioner has sought the review of the judgment by nine Judges' Bench of this Court in Advocate on Record Association v. Union of India & Ors., 1993 4 SCC 441; so also in the case of Special Reference No.1 of 1998 (reported in (1998) 7 SCC 739), whereby this Court declared the primacy of the collegium in the matter of appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
(2.) As Mr. Rajiv Daiya, Chairman of the Trust appeared in person and was not able to render any assistance to the Court. Thus, we requested Mr A.K. Ganguli, learned Senior counsel alongwith Mr. Bharat Sangal to assist the Court as amicus curiae. The petition raises large number of complicated issues. Meanwhile, we also sought assistance of the learned Attorney General for India.
(3.) Shri A.K. Ganguly, learned senior Advocate, has submitted: That the method of appointment of a Supreme Court Judge is mentioned in Article 124(2) of the Constitution of India which states: "Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty five years. Provided that in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall always be consulted." It may be noted that there is no mention: (i) for any Collegium in Article 124(2). (ii) The word used in Article 124(2) is 'consultation', and not 'concurence. (iii) The President of India while appointing a Supreme Court Judge can consult any Judge of the Supreme Court or even High Court as he deems necessary for the purpose, and is not bound to consult only the five seniormost Judges of the Supreme Court.;