The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition that challenged the transfer of Justice Yashwant Verma from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court..A Bench of Justices Attau Rahman Masoodi and Ajai Kumar Srivastava observed that there was no merit in the PIL."Transfer, administration of Oath and functioning of a Judge are the concomitants of tenure protected under Article 124 (4) read with Article 217 (1) (b) of the Constitution of India. Once the notification impugned in the writ petition holds good in the eye of law, challenge to the concomitant part is equally protected, provided the procedure is followed," the Court held. .The Court added that it cannot intervene on the judicial side in such matters. "All such decisions (regarding transfers and appointments of judges) taken after following due procedure under law are non-justiciable once the tenure of a High Court Judge is protected under Article 124 (4) read with Article 217 (1) (b) of the Constitution of India ... We do not find that any of the grounds urged before us is made out, more so when the issue raised before this Court is non-justiciable," it observed. .The Court further noted that the protection of a judge's tenure is part of the independence of the judiciary, as an organ of the State. "The protection to tenure is a part and parcel of independence of judiciary as an organ of the State, therefore, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court against the impugned action is virtually nothing but to question the tenure regarding which the proceedings on the floor of the two houses of the Parliament remain decisive but nothing has been brought to our notice attracting justiciability. The Court may hasten to add that the privilege of discussion lies within the precincts of the two houses of the Parliament and not beyond," the Court said..Notably, Justice Varma's transfer to the Allahabad High Court was mired in some controversy, as it followed the recovery of unaccounted cash at his Delhi residence by the fire fighters who had arrived to douse a small fire. Amid allegations of corruptions and an in-house probe ordered into the matter by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, the Supreme Court Collegium decided to transfer Justice Varma from Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court (his parent court). The transfer was fiercely opposed by lawyers in Uttar Pradesh. However, the Central government eventually cleared the Collegium proposal and Justice Varma took oath as an Allahabad High Court judge on April 5. However, pursuant to directions from the Supreme Court to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, no judicial work has been assigned to Justice Varma for now. .Meanwhile, a petition was also filed before the High Court by advocate Vikash Chaturvedi opposing Justice Varma's transfer. The petitioner claimed that Justice Varma's transfer violated the Constitution of India.The plea added when a judge takes oath, he swears to faithfully perform the duties of his office. Therefore, the decision to withhold judicial work from Justice Varma after his oath-taking undermines its constitutional sanctity, reducing the process to a mere formality, the petitioner said. The Court, however, eventually dismissed the plea. "We do not gather any procedural irregularity or illegality on account of which the action sought to be assailed may fall as untenable in the eye of law even at the instance of the party aggrieved," it said. .The petitioner was represented by Advocate Ashok Pandey. Additional Solicitor General Gaurav Mehrotra appeared for the Central government. .[Read Order]
