The Union government told the Supreme Court that the appointment of the chairman and members of the Law Commission of India was under consideration by the authorities concerned and that there was no proposal for it. make it a statutory body.
The Law Commission undertakes legal research and examines existing laws to reform and enact new legislation with reference made to it by the Center, the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
He has been headless since September 1, 2018.
In response to a PIL filed by BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, the Ministry of Law and Justice said the 22nd Law Commission was formed on February 21, 2020 and the appointment of its chairman and its members were being examined by the authorities concerned.
Describing the PIL as frivolous and unsustainable being devoid of merit, the ministry said the petitioner raised an issue that does not fall under the doctrine of the separation of powers and that the government is currently seized with the issue of the appointment of the president and members.
The highest court had asked January 25 for a response from the Center on a PIL to make the Law Commission a statutory body and appoint the president and members of the body.
The petitioner asserted that the Law Commission is not functioning, the Center does not benefit from the recommendations of this specialized body on the different aspects of the law, which are entrusted to it for study and recommendations.
The Commission is also responsible for undertaking studies and research to bring about reforms in the systems of justice delivery for the elimination of delays in proceedings, the expeditious resolution of cases, the reduction of the costs of litigation, etc., he stressed.
Upadhyay asked the court to order the Center to take appropriate steps to appoint a chairperson and members of the Twenty Second Law Commission of India.
Alternatively, being the guardian of the Constitution and the protector of fundamental rights, the tribunal can use its plenary constitutional power to appoint the chairperson and members of the Indian Commission and declare it as a statutory body, he argued.
In its response, the ministry said the claims made by the petitioner misled the court into posting a notice in the PIL, which risked being rejected at high cost at the pre-admission stage only.
Watch the latest DH videos here: