CJI Surya Kant: SC Collegium examining Justice Mehta's Rajasthan HC allegations
Synopsis
Three letters, serious allegations, and now a Collegium inquiry — CJI Surya Kant has confirmed the Supreme Court is examining Justice Sandeep Mehta's claims of 'gross maladministration' against Rajasthan High Court's Acting Chief Justice. The CJI's insistence on institutional process over public adjudication signals how the judiciary plans to handle one of its most sensitive internal disputes in recent memory.
Key Takeaways
CJI Surya Kant confirmed on 26 August that the Supreme Court Collegium is examining allegations raised by Justice Sandeep Mehta against Rajasthan HC Acting CJ Sanjeev Prakash Sharma .
Justice Mehta wrote three letters — on 2 August , 10 August , and 17 August — alleging 'gross maladministration' , case-listing manipulation, and favouritism.
CJI stressed that letters alone 'cannot be treated as findings' against Justice Sharma, who must be given a fair opportunity to respond.
The CJI warned against resolving judicial complaints through 'competing claims in the media' .
Justice Sharma has been Acting Chief Justice since 28 September 2025 and is due to retire on 26 September 2026 .
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday, 26 August confirmed that the Supreme Court Collegium is examining concerns raised by apex court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta over the functioning of the Rajasthan High Court, including allegations against its Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. The CJI stressed that the matter must be resolved through established institutional channels, not in the public domain.
Background: Three Letters, Serious Allegations
Justice Mehta wrote to the CJI and the Supreme Court Collegium on 2 August, 10 August, and 17 August, urging the appointment of a regular Chief Justice from another High Court to head the Rajasthan High Court and seeking the transfer of Justice Sharma out of the state. Justice Mehta, who was himself elevated to the Supreme Court from the Rajasthan High Court, alleged 'gross maladministration' and 'seriously questionable activities' on Justice Sharma's part.
Specific allegations included misuse of administrative powers, manipulation of case listings, favouritism towards certain lawyers and parties, and questionable exercise of roster powers. In one letter, Justice Mehta also alleged that Justice Sharma had threatened fellow judges with retributive action — including transfer — while claiming closeness with the CJI. Justice Mehta described the continued failure to appoint a regular Chief Justice from another state as 'wholly against the interest of the Institution.'
What the CJI Said
In an official statement, CJI Kant made clear that the allegations in Justice Mehta's letters 'cannot by themselves be treated as findings' against Justice Sharma. 'The fact that allegations have been made, therefore, cannot by itself be treated as a finding against the judge,' the statement read.
The CJI confirmed he had 'already taken note of the concerns' and that the Collegium is simultaneously working on appointing Chief Justices for the remaining High Courts. He added: 'The matter is being examined at the appropriate level, and the process will take into account the material placed by Justice Mehta as well as the response of Justice Sharma.'
Due Process and Fair Hearing Emphasis
A central thread of CJI Kant's response was procedural fairness. He underlined that Justice Sharma must be given a fair opportunity to respond before any conclusion is reached. Any decision on the Acting Chief Justice's continuation, transfer, or other administrative action would be taken by the 'competent institutional authority' only after due consideration of all material before it.
The CJI also pushed back against the matter spilling into the media: 'The Supreme Court cannot allow individual complaints concerning judges to be determined through competing claims in the media,' he said.
Who Is Justice Sharma
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma was appointed a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in November 2016. He subsequently served at the Patna High Court following a transfer before returning to Rajasthan. He was appointed Acting Chief Justice with effect from 28 September 2025 and is due to retire on 26 September 2026, according to available judicial records.
What Happens Next
The Collegium's examination is ongoing, with no timeline publicly indicated. The process will weigh Justice Mehta's material alongside Justice Sharma's response. The broader question of appointing regular Chief Justices to vacant High Courts — a long-standing institutional concern — remains on the Collegium's agenda and may determine the Rajasthan HC's leadership well before Justice Sharma's retirement date.
Point of View
Even as the judiciary insists the matter stay out of the public domain. The tension is real: the Collegium's opacity on High Court appointments has historically been what drives judges to write letters in the first place. If the system had a credible, timely mechanism for flagging internal misconduct, a sitting Supreme Court judge would not need to write three escalating letters over three weeks. The CJI's emphasis on due process is correct in principle, but the absence of any timeline or independent oversight mechanism leaves the outcome entirely within the same institution that is being questioned.
NationPress
27 Aug 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What allegations has Justice Sandeep Mehta raised against Rajasthan HC Acting CJ Sanjeev Prakash Sharma?
Justice Mehta has alleged 'gross maladministration' and 'seriously questionable activities' by Acting Chief Justice Sharma, including misuse of administrative powers, manipulation of case listings, favouritism towards certain lawyers and parties, and threatening fellow judges with transfer. He made these allegations across three letters written on 2 August, 10 August, and 17 August.
What has CJI Surya Kant said about the allegations?
CJI Surya Kant confirmed on 26 August that the Supreme Court Collegium is examining the matter through established institutional processes. He clarified that Justice Mehta's letters cannot by themselves be treated as findings against Justice Sharma, who must be given a fair opportunity to respond before any conclusion is reached.
Who is Rajasthan HC Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma?
Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma was appointed a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in November 2016 and later served at the Patna High Court. He returned to Rajasthan and was appointed Acting Chief Justice from 28 September 2025. He is due to retire on 26 September 2026.
Why did Justice Mehta write to the CJI?
Justice Mehta urged the CJI and the Supreme Court Collegium to appoint a regular Chief Justice from another High Court to head the Rajasthan High Court and sought the transfer of Justice Sharma out of the state. He argued that the continued failure to appoint a regular Chief Justice was 'wholly against the interest of the Institution.'
What happens next in the Rajasthan HC dispute?
The Supreme Court Collegium will examine the material submitted by Justice Mehta alongside Justice Sharma's response. Any decision on Justice Sharma's continuation, transfer, or other administrative action will be taken by the competent institutional authority. No public timeline has been indicated.
