<p class="title">The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a petition seeking a direction to the Centre not to proceed with the recommendation of the apex court Collegium on the appointment of a lawyer as a judge of the Allahabad High Court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice D Y Chandrachud said there was "no merit" in the plea which was also "not justiciable".</p>.<p class="bodytext">"The Collegium has submitted its recommendation. It is a constitutional process. In the midst of a constitutional process, this petition is not maintainable," the bench told advocate Asok Pande, who has filed the plea.</p>.<p class="bodytext">When Pande claimed that there were allegations against the lawyer whose name has been recommended by the Collegium and an FIR was also lodged against him and some others, the bench said: "you have said in your petition that the FIR has been quashed".</p>.<p class="bodytext">"There is no merit in the petition. It is not justiciable," the bench said while dismissing the plea.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner had sought a direction to the Union Ministry of Law not to proceed to appoint the lawyer as a judge of the Allahabad High Court in compliance of the Collegium's recommendation last month.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He had also sought quashing of the recommendation besides a probe by either the CBI or a special investigation team (SIT) into the FIR lodged at Allahabad under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including cheating and forgery.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He alleged in the plea that between 2002 to 2007, an agricultural institute had filed 24 writ petitions before the Allahabad High Court and five pleas before the apex court in the name of dead and non-existent persons.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The plea claimed that the high court had ordered its registrar to lodge an FIR in the case in which the lawyer, whose name has been recommended by the Collegium, was also named. It alleged that before the FIR was lodged, the lawyer's name was recommended for appointment as judge in the high court but it was not processed later.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petition said that the lawyer had filed a plea in the high court seeking quashing of the FIR against him, which was allowed by the court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">After quashing of the FIR against him, the apex court Collegium recommended his name for appointment as a judge in the high court on the ground that the state of Uttar Pradesh has not challenged the order quashing lodging of the case, the plea has claimed. </p>
<p class="title">The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a petition seeking a direction to the Centre not to proceed with the recommendation of the apex court Collegium on the appointment of a lawyer as a judge of the Allahabad High Court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice D Y Chandrachud said there was "no merit" in the plea which was also "not justiciable".</p>.<p class="bodytext">"The Collegium has submitted its recommendation. It is a constitutional process. In the midst of a constitutional process, this petition is not maintainable," the bench told advocate Asok Pande, who has filed the plea.</p>.<p class="bodytext">When Pande claimed that there were allegations against the lawyer whose name has been recommended by the Collegium and an FIR was also lodged against him and some others, the bench said: "you have said in your petition that the FIR has been quashed".</p>.<p class="bodytext">"There is no merit in the petition. It is not justiciable," the bench said while dismissing the plea.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner had sought a direction to the Union Ministry of Law not to proceed to appoint the lawyer as a judge of the Allahabad High Court in compliance of the Collegium's recommendation last month.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He had also sought quashing of the recommendation besides a probe by either the CBI or a special investigation team (SIT) into the FIR lodged at Allahabad under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including cheating and forgery.</p>.<p class="bodytext">He alleged in the plea that between 2002 to 2007, an agricultural institute had filed 24 writ petitions before the Allahabad High Court and five pleas before the apex court in the name of dead and non-existent persons.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The plea claimed that the high court had ordered its registrar to lodge an FIR in the case in which the lawyer, whose name has been recommended by the Collegium, was also named. It alleged that before the FIR was lodged, the lawyer's name was recommended for appointment as judge in the high court but it was not processed later.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petition said that the lawyer had filed a plea in the high court seeking quashing of the FIR against him, which was allowed by the court.</p>.<p class="bodytext">After quashing of the FIR against him, the apex court Collegium recommended his name for appointment as a judge in the high court on the ground that the state of Uttar Pradesh has not challenged the order quashing lodging of the case, the plea has claimed. </p>