Bangalore, June 15 (IANS) Karnataka High Court judge D.V. Shylendra Kumar, whom the Supreme Court pulled up for indiscipline Tuesday, is perhaps one of the few judges who blogs and does not mince words in criticizing the judiciary’s shortcomings.
The 59-year-old, who has been openly opposing state Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran continuing in the post despite land grab allegations against him, has not spared the Supreme Court collegium also.
The Collegium consists of five senior Supreme Court judges, including the chief justice, and decides the transfer of high court judges or their elevation to the apex court.
Shylendra Kumar became an advocate in 1976 and practised in Madras and Karnataka High Courts. He became an Additional Judge of the Karnataka High Court in 2000 and made a permanent judge in 2002.
He started his blog ‘justdvskumar’ in August last year and posted details of the assets owned by him and his wife Veena Kumar. He was the first judge to make public his assets while the issue was still being debated by the judiciary.
Shylendra Kumar has been vocal in his criticism of the former Chief Justice of India (CJI) K.G. Balakrishnan also, particularly over his opposition to assets declaration by judges and application of Right to Information Act (RTI) to judiciary.
‘It is a matter of utmost paradox that the chief justice… should be expressing, apprehension for the safety and security of the judges of the superior courts in this country by saying that revealing the particulars of assets of the judges and throwing open the information to public domain may result in harassment to judges and in turn prevent the judges from performing their duties without fear or favour,’ Shylendra Kumar wrote in one of his blogs.
He also asserted that the CJI has no authority to speak for all other judges.
‘On the legal plane, the Chief Justice of India does not have the authority to speak for all other judges of the superior courts… unless any of them have either confided in the chief justice or have authorized him to speak on behalf of others also.’
Shylendra Kumar described the Supreme Court Collegium as ‘secretive’.
Titled ‘Errant Judges and Secretive Collegium of the Supreme Court’, he wrote: ‘The manner of functioning of the collegium of the Supreme Court of India has drawn flak from all sections of society and it is a matter of utmost concern and even a matter of shame for the members of the judiciary that the collegium of the Supreme Court is blissfully remaining insensitive to public opinion/reaction, but, is only playing GOD by not responding.’
In a 12-page letter to Dinakaran posted on the blog, Shylendra Kumar had asked him not to sit on the bench, to resign and leave the institution and ‘to retain only such of those properties which you own/possess as of now, which according to your conscience are properties acquired in a legal and proper manner and rest of the properties should be surrendered to the state so that they are distributed among the needy and poor people….’
Shylendra Kumar has also posted details of ‘hospitality expenditure’ incurred since Dinakaran took over as Chief Justice.
‘…I heard that there were some malpractices, particularly, some illegalities having taken place in the matter of expenditure incurred by the High Court under the head ‘hospitality expenditure’, more so, during the stewardship of Justice P.D. Dinakaran as Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court.
‘Being a little disturbed with such development, I had sought for some factual information from the registry and the information which I received has not put me at ease, but on the other hand has put me to great uneasiness and anxiety, particularly about the way and the direction which our high court is heading,’ he said explaining why he was posting the details on May 23, the last post on the blog.
