SC dismisses petition challenging collegium’s decision, Victoria Gowri sworn in as HC judge

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court heard the arguments challenging the appointment of Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri from taking oath as a judge of the Madras High Court. The Supreme Court observed that people with political background have been appointed in the past. The oath taking ceremony began while the hearing in the apex court was still underway. Gowri was sworn in as an additional judge of the Madras High Court at 10.45 am. Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice B R Gavai heard the arguments.

Justice B R Gavai while considering the petition asked wasn’t Justice V R Krishna Iyer a judge. He added that he too had a political background. Re-examining the collegium's decision can lead to problems. The decision of the collegium could not be cancelled. An order cannot be issued after cancelling Gowri’s appointment as judge. Demanding the collegium to re-examine is unusual. The Supreme Court has held that the court cannot say whether one is fit to be a judge, it can only check the eligibility.

Meantime, the petitioners told the court that they are not against political background, but it is the hate speech. Senior lawyer Raju Ramachandran pointed that Victoria Gowri is not qualified to be a judge. Soon after hearing the arguments, Gowri was sworn in as a judge of the Madras High Court.

There were protests from various quarters after the center approved the appointment of Gowri, a former BJP leader. Victoria Gowri is one who has been embroiled in controversy for her remarks against minorities. The Supreme Court collegium had on January 17 recommended the center to appoint five including Gowri, lawyer of Madurai bench Madras High Court, as high court judges. The Chief Justice and the President had received complaints requesting that Gowri should not be appointed as a judge.

Gowri was criticized for being unfit for the post because of her anti-minority articles written in the RSS mouthpiece Organizer. A group of lawyers in the Madras High Court approached the Supreme Court, arguing that her stands were not suitable for constitutional values.