Collegium recommendation review will open ‘pandora’s box’: SC

THe sublime margaret court on mon refused to think of a petition filed by a Himachal Pradesh fellowship court judge seeking reconsideration of his elevation by the high court collegium observing that doing so will open a Pandora’s Box.Allowing the officer to withdraw and pursue his remedies before the HImachal Pradesh high court, a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi said, “Once collegium recommendation is made and there are discussions on it, how can we interfere on the judicial side. This will open a Pandora’s Box.”The judge, Arvind Malhotra, agreed to withdraw his plea to avail the remedy of approaching the high court. Senior advocate Balbir Singh appearing for him submitted that the high court collegium on September 23, 2025 recommended three names of judicial officers junior to him. Malhotra feared that the choice may have been influenced by an allegation against him that he claims has no grounds.According to Singh, on September 17, Malhotra received a notice from Registrar (Vigilance) of the HP high court to which he responded on September 25. According to him, since the HC collegium had already made its recommendation by then, there was no opportunity for Malhotra’s response being considered.The petition in the apex court came after the Supreme Court collegium, on June 2, endorsed the high court collegium’s recommendations jeopardising Malhotra’s case for elevation despite being senior.The bench said: “Merely because you are in seniority does not make you entitled for elevation. The high court collegium even interacted with you and called for certain documents. There is secrecy attached to the collegium proceedings. Now the Supreme Court collegium recommendation is a supervening circumstance. What you may now be required to challenge is the Supreme Court collegium and not the high court collegium’s recommendation.”Singh pointed out that this is not the first time he has approached the top court seeking denial of consideration for elevation. In September 2024, the top court passed an order on a petition filed by him and another officer Chirag Bhanu Singh requesting thehigh court to reconsider their names. Incidentally, Chirag Bhanu Singh figures in the list of three judicial officers recommended by SC Collegium on June 2.The court said, “You need to have some patience in these matters. Your candidature has not been rejected. We cannot be functioning like RTI asking the high court collegium to disclose to you the contents pertaining to your consideration.”The bench found that no cause of action arises as of now. “At best, we are left to guess what was there before the high court collegium when they had an interaction with you and that they may have deferred consideration. The Supreme Court collegium, being a more wiser body, is privy to all the material and has decided what is decided by the high court collegium to be just and fair. If the SC collegium had not taken a call, we may still have a window open.”Singh urged the court to issue a direction to the high court to reconsider his case as it did in 2024. He pointed out that even the ground for the vigilance notice does not survive as the basis of the allegation was closed by the full bench of the high court in his favour.The court demurred.“Can a direction be made to the high court collegium or the Supreme Court collegium on your guessing? We do not want to open a Pandora’s Box here on the proceedings conducted in the collegium. Ultimately there may be nothing against you. You may only be imagining things. We are not privy to anything,” said the bench, allowing the officer’s plea to be withdrawn. Singh told the court that Malhotra may either approach the administrative side (of the high court) to know the fate of his response on the Registrar (Vigilance) notice.