New Delhi: A retired judge of the Supreme Court and two other legal luminaries have together written an opinion piece in the Indian Express asking the Supreme Court’s collegium why it “refused to bring Justice S. Muralidhar” to the apex court despite his exemplary record as a judge and legal mind.The essay, headlined ‘A question for the collegium’, appeared in the paper today, August 16. It is written by Justice Madan B. Lokur, who retired as Supreme Court judge and had once been a member of the SC collegium which selects judges for appointment to high courts and the Supreme Court, noted jurist and senior advocate Fali Nariman and senior advocate and mediation specialist Sriram Panchu.Justice Muralidhar retired as chief justice of the Orissa high court on August 7 this year. “The purpose of this piece is to ask the collegium why his retirement date was not August 7, 2026, from the Supreme Court,” the essay opens.The authors cite Justice Muralidhar’s years as a lawyer, mainly in the Supreme Court, and including as the Election Commission’s counsel when T.N. Seshan headed it. The authors observed that his engagement with the law has been wide and deep. They note that his book Law, Poverty and Legal Aid: Access to Criminal Justice is a seminal contribution to the subject.What was an impressive bio acquired “legendary proportions,” write the authors, once the judge came to the Delhi high court. He served there between 2006 and 2020. The authors note Justice Muralidhar’s many significant cases and the balance he struck in them.Also read: Justice Muralidhar on the Distinction Between Neutrality and ImpartialityAmong key judgements that Justice Muralidhar authored is the Naz Foundation one that decriminalised consensual homosexuality, the conviction of Congress leader Sajjan Kumar for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, the sentencing of 16 policemen for the killings of 38 Muslims in Hashimpura and the bail to Gautam Navlakha, arrested in the Elgar Parishad case.The authors note especially how a bench headed by him ensured ambulance services to riot-affected areas in northeast Delhi in 2020, through a late night hearing.His appointment as Orissa high court judge, the writers say, changed the identity of the hitherto quiet court which henceforth saw innovation. “Just have a glance at the website of the Orissa High Court. Its filings, records, fees are in e-mode, it has paperless benches, hybrid hearings and e-libraries,” they write.All his efforts to design a better system came with significant judicial work pressure. The authors write that Justice Muralidhar’s bench disposed of 33,322 cases in his 31 months and delivered 545 judgments.The guard of honour he received at his retirement was enormous and “has never happened before,” they noted, observing that the judge at 62 had much more to give that the judiciary has lost a treasured asset with his retirement. Hard questions must thus be asked of the collegium, they write.“With such merit on display, along with matchless integrity and probity, on what grounds was he denied his rightful place? Sometimes these questions are asked rhetorically, but his case is a cause celebre, the kind of case that comes up to illustrate the workings of a system, which must be seized upon if we want to examine and improve.”The writers also asked why Justice Muralidhar was not “even made Chief Justice of the larger and chartered High Court of Madras, a move initiated by the collegium, not acted upon by government and not pursued by the collegium?”The collegium’s resolution in April recalling its recommendation for this transfer, wrote V. Venkatesan, made its helplessness in the face of the government’s defiance for over six months quite clear.The answers, they write, are not blowing in the wind.