Sekarreporter1: Mhc chief justice transfer mhc advocates 2nd day debate. Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 14:34] Sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1459447007282487298?t=MbYYGJqPXHQ8M4trs8Trng&s=08 [11/13, 14:34] Sekarreporter1: Senior advocates Hon’b(e Mr. Justice NV Ramana, The Chief Justice of
[11/13, 21:00] Sekarreporter1: Mhc chief justice transfer mhc eminent advocates full debate. Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 14:34] Sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1459447007282487298?t=MbYYGJqPXHQ8M4trs8Trng&s=08 [11/13, 14:34] Sekarreporter1: Senior advocates Hon’b(e Mr. Justice NV Ramana, The Chief Justice of India Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. Hon’ble Mr. Justice U.U. La(it, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. 3, Hon’b(e Mr. Justice A.M. khanwi(kar, Supreme Court of India, New https://sekarreporter.com/mhc-chief-justice-transfer-mhc-eminent-advocates-full-debate-sekarreporter1-11-13-1434-sekarreporter1-https-twitter-com-sekarreporter1-status-1459447007282487298tmbyygjqpxhq8m4trs8trngs/
[11/13, 21:42] Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 21:10] V subramani Advt: Sekar..my masge is very clear….what and which issue is diverted.??….it is direct response to what Raffic pointed out…First ..I make it very clear i never employed any unpleasant words….it needs to be pointed out…..what is meaning of transparency in therir interpretation…Making the collegiam as public forum and allowing all kinds of debate abt methodology and decision making process is the meaning ..what Raffic meant…then .it is kind of highly iilogical…and lacks total sensitivity….Already cj has been put into unpleasant situation by the letter..of seniors..plse avoid bringing politics into this transfer issue.. .
[11/13, 21:15] V subramani Advt: In fact …this kind of msges and letters would put our cj into an embrassing situation….Futher..our cj never authorized anyone to write letter to collegiam on his behalf…
[11/13, 21:42] Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 21:10] V subramani Advt: Sekar..my masge is very clear….what and which issue is diverted.??….it is direct response to what Raffic pointed out…First ..I make it very clear i never employed any unpleasant words….it needs to be pointed out…..what is meaning of transparency in therir interpretation…Making the collegiam as public forum and allowing all kinds of debate abt methodology and decision making process is the meaning ..what Raffic meant…then .it is kind of highly iilogical…and lacks total sensitivity….Already cj has been put into unpleasant situation by the letter..of seniors..plse avoid bringing politics into this transfer issue.. .
[11/13, 21:15] V subramani Advt: In fact …this kind of msges and letters would put our cj into an embrassing situation….Futher..our cj never authorized anyone to write letter to collegiam on his behalf…
[11/14, 07:18] Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 22:57] Mohamad Rafic Eb: I think VS did not read my entire message content.
Diversion No. 1.
VS speaks about Cricism of Judicial Decision by some some section of the litigants who are aggrieved by such judicial decision.
Diversion No. 2.
VS mentioned about National Security in discussing about Sudden transfer of a, reputed CJ of Chartered High Court heading about 70 HC Judges.
Diversion No. 3.
As if I have some grievances about the Collegium Function.
Collegium is dealing with transfer of Judges on the administrative side.
With due respect to the Collegium, any expectation of transpancy in Collegium administrative decision like Transfer, certainly would not amount to showing disrespect to the Constitutional bodies.
Members of the Bar and Bench are not expecting Judicial Accountability.
Rather we expect accountability on the Administrative side of the Collegium.
Collegium is subject to other Constitiinal provisions..
VS has not understood the objective of the latter written by the Senior Advocates.
VS expects the BAR to maintain continued silence and inaction of any decisions under the pretext of administrative reasons..
It is the legitimate rights of the BAR to place the genuine grievances in such matters before the Collegium as the BAR and Benches are two sides of the Coin.
No bench without BAR.
No Bar without Bench
No Bench and BAR without the litigants public.
My basic question is where is the question of National Security in CJ matters to a smaller High Court of four Judges….
What VS, attemped to express. (
[11/13, 23:22] Mohamad Rafic Eb: I am stopping with this as there is no point in attempting to make one understand who refuses to understand the reality of truth
[11/14, 07:18] Sekarreporter1: [11/13, 22:19] Kasi Ramalingam: The so-called seniors who are signatories to the Supreme Court Collegium have absolutely no Locus standi in interefering in the Administrative Decisions of our Supreme Court, if they are well versed in law, such so called signatories could have exercised their scope under the Right to Information Act 😄 .There may be so many reasons, Advocates ,whether Senior or Junior can’t have any Statutory obligations ,as matters of rights, just out of over reactions,it happens 🤔
[11/13, 22:23] Kasi Ramalingam: Where they go when same transfer of Previous CJ happens in earlier occasions, needless to mention whom, we mean 🤔
[11/14, 08:15] Sekarreporter1: [11/14, 07:49] Mohamad Rafic Eb: This Transfer policy on Administrative reasons started way back in 1980s initially by heads, of political Govt Justice M M Ismail .. Later such practices followed by the Collegium on few more occasion like this inviting valid and serious objections from the Bar.
Justice K S, Bakthavatsalam transfer in Mid 1990s..
Justice T S Sivagnam recently.
It is not every decision of the Collegium on Transfer policies are subjected to Criticism.
In fact Bar was happy in few other earlier transfers effected by Collegium on the allegations of Corruption and other reasons.
Only certain deserving cases are dealt with request to reconsider the decision of the Collegium.
I am stopping with this as there is no point in attempting to make one who are capable of understanding but refuse to understand the reality of truth .
[11/14, 08:15] Sekarreporter1: ..
