High Court advocates oppose transfer of acting CJ

Opposing the transfer of the acting Chief Justice of Madras High Court Justice T Raja by terming it as a “disincentive for efficiency and judicial decency”, the Madras High Court Advocates Association (MHAA) on Friday demanded the immediate recall of the recommendation and that he be allowed to continue in his present capacity till he attains superannuation.

In a strongly worded letter to Chief Justice of India, Justice D Y Chandrachud, the MHAA said reports about the transfer of justice T Raja, who has been the acting chief justice since September after incumbent justice M N Bhandari retired, “does not bode well for the judiciary.”

The letter signed by G Mohana Krishnan, President, MHAA, said justice Raja, during his 13-year tenure in the chartered high court, has delivered several thousand judgments and has earned a reputation as a “people's judge” who will render justice irrespective of who appears and argues before him.

“While so, the proposed sudden transfer, that too while he has just about six months of his illustrious career left, is definitely bad news for the judiciary in this part of the country,” Krishnan said, adding that the move is seen as “a disincentive for efficiency and judicial decency.”

The letter, registering its “strongest opposition” to the proposed transfer, asked the Supreme Court, the Collegium that recommends appointments and transfers of judges, and the Union Government to drop the proposal and let justice Raja to continue in his present capacity till he attains superannuation.

Justice Raja was appointed as an additional judge of the Madras High Court on March 31, 2009. This is the third time in recent years that sitting or acting chief justices of the Madras High Court have been transferred – it was justice V L Tahilramani in 2019 and justice Sanjib Banerjee in 2021, and now justice Raja.

In 2021, several senior counsels wrote a letter to the Collegium that the “constant transfers and postings have left the Madras High Court in a state of constant flux.” They had also said the transfers are perceived to be punitive and do not augur well for the independence of the judiciary.

The lawyers had also batted for a fixed two-year tenure for Chief Justices of larger High Courts like the Madras High Court, in order to enable them to make worthwhile contributions to the improvement and development of the Institution.