 The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain petitions against the government’s proposed law on judicial appointments. The bench however kept all issues raised by the petitioners open and said that the petitioners can challenge the government's view again at a later stage. A three-judge bench led by Justice Anil R Dave termed the petitions as “pre-mature” and declined to admit them for hearing. The petitioners had challenged the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) bill on August 21. Three PILs were filed in the Supreme Court for declaring the NJAC move as unconstitutional. The PILs were filed by former Additional Solicitor General Bishwajit Bhattacharya, advocates RK Kapoor and Manohar Lal Sharma and Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association. The lawyers submitted that the 121st Constitutional Amendment Bill and the NJAC Bill, 2014, passed by Parliament were unconstitutional as they violate the basic structure of the Constitution. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said that this particular challenge is premature. The court order came as Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the bench that the issues relating to the Constitutional amendment Bill and the National Judicial Appointment Commission ( NJAC ) Bill was still withing the sphere of the Parliament and hence could not be subjected to judicial review. He added that the Constitution provided for completion of various stages before a Bill becomes a law and hence any interference with the parliamentary process was uncalled for. Appearing for the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record (AoR), senior advocate Fali S Nariman however said that the moot issue whether the amendment Bill and the NJAC Bill could be challenged at this stage or not should be sent to a five-judge Constitution Bench for consideration. Nariman, along with another petitioner, advocate M L Sharma also raised questions as to how without an assent by the President to the amendment Bill, the NJAC Bill was passed by both the Houses of the Parliament. They said that without amending the Constitution, passage of the NJAC Bill was totally illegal and unconstitutional. |