In exercise of the powers conferred under clause 2 of Article 124 ((Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty five years: Provided that in the case of appointment of a Judge other than the chief Justice, the chief Justice of India shall always be consulted: (a) a Judge may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office; (b) a Judge may be removed from his office in the manner provided in clause ( 4 ) of Article 124.))of Indian Constitution, President Pranab Mukherjee on June 29, 2013 (Saturday) appointed Justice Palanisamy Sathasivam as 40th Chief Justice of India. Appointment will be effective from July 19, 2013 as Justice Altamas Kabir the present CJI will be retiring on July 18, 2013.
Justice Palanisamy Sathasivam belonged to an agricultural family hailing from Kadappanallur village, Bhavani taluk in Erode district of Tamil Nadu. He was appointed as permanent judge of the Madras High Court on January 8, 1996. He disposed of more cases in service, labour and accident claim matters, as High Court judge. On April 20, 2007, he was transferred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Justice Palanisamy Sathasivam never served as Chief Justice of any High Court as he was elevated directly to the Supreme Court on August 21, 2007, while he was serving as a Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Few landmark judgments delivered by Justice Palanisamy Sathasivam as a Supreme Court Judge are;
Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. v. Reliance Industries Limited
Emphasized the use of natural resources through public sector undertakings and further observed that “in a national democracy like ours, the national assets belong to the people” and “the government owns such assets for the purposes of developing them in the interests of the people.”
Rabindra Kumar Pal alias Dara Singh v. Union of India
It was the triple murder case of Australian Christian missionary Graham Stuart Staines and his two minor sons. Judgment concluded with the hope that Mahatma Gandhi’s vision of religion playing a positive role in bringing India’s numerous religions and communities into an integrated prosperous nation be realised by way of equal respect for all religions.
It was held that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) exceeded its jurisdiction in lodging FIR of disproportionate assets against Mayawati in the Taj Corridor matter and the same was quashed as being illegal.