Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The recent transfer of MP High Court Judge Justice Atul Sreedharan to the Allahabad High Court marks a troubling episode in the functioning of the Supreme Court Collegium. The Collegium openly has recorded that the transfer was made at the Union Government's request, revealing a striking intrusion of executive influence into what is constitutionally supposed to be an independent judicial process.

Originally proposed for transfer from Madhya Pradesh to Chhattisgarh High Court, Justice Sreedharan - known for his bold rulings- was instead moved to Allahabad following the Centre's intervention, as explicitly admitted in the Collegium resolution.

The collegium resolution states :

“The Supreme Court Collegium, in its meeting held on 14th October, 2025, on reconsideration sought by the Government, resolved to recommend that Mr. Justice Atul Sreedharan, Judge, High Court of Madhya Pradesh, be transferred to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad instead of the High Court of Chhattisgarh.”

A Short Look to Justice Sreedharan's Judicial Journey

Appointed as an Additional Judge of MP High Court in 2016 and a Permanent Judge in 2018, Justice Atul Sreedharan's judicial journey reflects integrity, independence, and a willingness to question executive overreach. As a Judge of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, he has passed notable orders quashing arbitrary preventive detention orders under the J&K Public Safety Act and holding that mere criticism of Government won't be a UAPA offence. Notably, what counts as a rare instance of judicial probity, Justice Sreedharan himself had sought his transfer from MP High Court in 2023 citing that his daughter was planning to commence her practice of law in Madhya Pradesh. In 2025, he was repatriated to Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Recently, Justice Sreedharan suo motu ordered an FIR against Madhya Pradesh's Cabinet Minister Vijay Shah for his detestable and communal comments targeting Col.Sofiya Qureshi, and decided to monitor the investigation. However, the Supreme Court later stayed Justice Sreedharan's order, protecting Shah from arrest.

Justice Sreedharan was part of the High Court bench which registered a suo moto case on COVID mismanagement in the State of Madhya Pradesh, making the State Government accountable for their inactions. On October 15, 2025, the bench led by Justice Sreedharan took a suo moto cognizance of a video uploaded by YouTube News channels showing a young man from the OBC Community sitting in a temple, being compelled to wash the feet of another person and consume the said water.

“The repeated instances of caste-related violence and discriminative actions in the State of Madhya Pradesh is shocking. This is the same State, where a person of the general category urinated on the head of a tribal person.”, Justice Sreedharan said.

Transfer Order Failed To Record Reasons For Transfer

Though collegium mentions the fact of the request from the Centre, no reasons are provided as to why the change was warranted or why the initial resolution had to be abandoned. Why Allahabad was considered more appropriate than Chhattisgarh was also left unanswered. In the absence of clear criteria and reasoning, the public would be tempted to presume that extraneous considerations and not the institutional requirements played a role in decision-making.

In Justice Sreedharan's case, the transfer has impacted his seniority; while in Chhattisgarh, he would have been the second judge and thus part of the High Court Collegium, in Allahabad, he would stand seventh.

Justice Sreedharan's transfer is part of a broader pattern where judges showing independence in politically sensitive cases have faced controversial moves. The transfers of Justice S. Muralidhar, Justice Jayant Patel, Justice Akil Kureshi, Justice Rajiv Shakdher etc., were also viewed as executive reactions to their bold decisions.

Government Is Comfortable With Current Collegium System

Ironically, the government seems perfectly comfortable with the current arrangement. Despite repeated debates about replacing the Collegium with a more accountable system, the executive knows it no longer needs to push for any structural change. Over the past decade, a steady stream of appointments aligned with government preferences has quietly tilted the judiciary's balance. If this trend continues, the Collegium itself would become a mirror of power populated by judges whose outlook is congenial to the government of the day, effectively converting the judiciary itself into an extension of the executive.

(The Author is a Supreme Court Correspondent at Live Law. He can be reached at [email protected].)