SC recommends Justice Rajendra Menon as AFT chairperson

Former Delhi High Court Chief Justice Rajendra Menon has been recommended as the new chairperson of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT). The Supreme Court has asked the Centre to appoint Menon immediately, as the incumbent retires on October 6.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court said on Monday that Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi has recommended the name of former Delhi High Court chief justice Rajendra Menon as chairperson of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT).

The Centre told a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S A Bobde and S Abdul Nazeer that prima facies it has no objection with regard to accepting the recommendation.

"So far as the Chairperson of the Tribunal is concerned, recommendations have been made and the matter is awaiting orders of the appropriate authority i.e. Union Government. The Union Government may act accordingly," the bench said.

The bench was hearing a plea seeking an extension of tenure of chairperson and two existing judicial members of the AFT, whose tenure is going to end on October 6, December 5 and December 14, respectively.

The chief justice said that it had cleared the name of successor of Justice Virendra Singh, the incumbent chairperson of the AFT, who is set to retire on October 6.

"The office of Chief Justice has cleared the name of the successor of the incumbent chairperson, the government may act accordingly," the bench said.

Attorney General K K Venugopal, appearing for Centre, said that prima facie government has no objection in accepting the recommendation of the chairperson.

He said that as far as filling of vacancies with regard to judicial members and administrative members in the AFT is concerned, a judgement on a batch of pleas challenging the validity of Finance Act, 2017, which dealt with the appointment of members of tribunals, is pending before the top court.

The attorney general said that at this stage no order is required as the judgement on the issue is pending.

Venugopal said that a committee headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar has recommended the names of eight judicial members and administrative members, but their appointment and tenure will be affected by the judgement on the issue.

"We have no problem in appointing the names recommended by Justice Khanwilkar led committee but the judgement on pleas challenging the validity of Finance Act, may have bearing on their appointment and tenure," he said.

Venugopal said that at present their are 14 vacancies of judicial members and 12 vacancies of administrative members in the AFTs.

"The incumbent chairperson is retiring on October 6, while some members are retiring in the month of December," he said.

"As the terms of the two Judicial Members are due to expire in December 2019, we do not consider it necessary to pass any order at this stage.

"So far as the fresh appointment to vacant posts of Judicial Members in the Tribunal is concerned, we leave it open to the Government to act on the basis of the recommendation of the Committee, if such recommendation has been made," the bench said.

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Gogoi had on April 2, reserved its verdict on a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the Finance Act, 2017.

The Centre had justified certification of Finance Bill, 2017 as money bill saying it has provisions which deals with salaries and allowance to be paid to members of tribunals from the consolidated funds of India.

It had contended that certification of Finance Act as money bill was done by the speaker of Lok Sabha and court cannot judicially review the decision.

The apex court had earlier sought the Centre''s view on bringing all the tribunals under one central umbrella for ensuring "efficient functioning" and "streamlining the working" of the quasi-judicial bodies.

The top court had said it would not like to be bogged down with what is right or wrong and all it wants was that "the tribunals work efficiently and independently".

The court had said it is tentatively of the view that directions given by the apex court in its two verdicts of 1997 and 2010 for bringing all the tribunals of the country under one nodal agency should have been "implemented long back".