SC judge alleges favouritism in Rajasthan HC, seeks Chief Justice from outside State

Supreme Court judge Sandeep Mehta has urged CJI Surya Kant to appoint a chief justice from outside Rajasthan, alleging maladministration, selective case listings and favouritism under acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma in three letters sent this month

New Delhi: Supreme Court judge Sandeep Mehta has urged Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant to appoint with “immediate effect” a chief justice from outside Rajasthan to head the high court in the state, alleging serious administrative irregularities and selective case listings under its acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma.

Justice Mehta, in his three letters dated August 2, 10 and 17, has accused the acting chief justice of the Rajasthan High Court of “maladministration”, “malpractices”, “nepotism” and “favouritism”.

---

The top court judge alleged that Justice Sharma had misused his powers as master of the roster to selectively transfer cases to his own bench, including matters involving influential and wealthy litigants.

Justice Mehta was appointed a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in May 2011. He became Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court in February 2023 and was elevated to the Supreme Court in November the same year.

Justice Sharma was appointed a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in November 2016 and transferred to the Patna High Court in January 2022.

His request for repatriation to Rajasthan on health grounds was not accepted by the Supreme Court Collegium in March 2023.

He was instead transferred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Collegium subsequently recommended his repatriation to Rajasthan in May 2025.

Justice Sharma has been functioning as the acting Chief Justice for more than 10 months after Justice S Shriram, the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, demitted office in September 2025.

Justice Mehta had previously brought several such instances against Justice Sharma to the CJI’s notice, including cases listed before other benches that were subsequently withdrawn and shifted to Justice Sharma’s court “without any justifiable cause”.

According to the letters, the CJI had initially asked him to provide details of such cases but later told him there was no need to put the allegations in writing and assured him that “suitable action” would be taken.

“However, till date, the request to have a Chief Justice from another state in my parent high court has met no positive response,” Justice Mehta wrote in his August 2 letter.

He said he had also received complaints about Justice Sharma’s judicial functioning which, in his assessment, “prima facie, raise doubts on his integrity”.

In his August 10 letter, Justice Mehta cited two cases which he described as “living proof” of what he alleged were attempts by Justice Sharma to exercise his administrative and judicial powers in favour of influential parties before his retirement on September 26.

Giving instances, Justice Mehta said, “These instances manifest brazen misuse of powers by the Acting Chief Justice Mr SP Sharma in order to favour influential parties and smack of corruption.”

Justice Mehta’s August 17 letter raised further concerns about the administration of the Rajasthan High Court and the treatment of members of the subordinate judiciary.

Justice Mehta also raised concerns over the Jodhpur District Court (Metro) building, which he said had been operationally and functionally complete for about a year.

According to his letter, Justice Sharma put the inauguration of the building on hold during a visit and ordered wholesale changes to its infrastructure.

Justice Mehta said this had occurred despite several courts in the Jodhpur Metro judgeship continuing to operate from rented premises, describing the resulting institutional loss as “unpardonable”.

The 40-court building was eventually inaugurated by CJI Surya Kant on August 15 after Justice Mehta and Supreme Court judge Justice Vijay Bishnoi requested him to do so, the letter said.

Justice Mehta also criticised the administration of the Rajasthan High Court over a three-day international conference held in Jaipur from July 31 to August 2.

He claimed that almost all judges of the high court were nominated to attend the event, leaving the principal seat at Jodhpur without a single functional court for two days.

Around 20-22 district judges were also allegedly nominated, leaving the districts concerned without their senior-most judicial officers.

Justice Mehta said several Rajasthan High Court judges had approached him during his visits to the state and expressed concern over Justice Sharma’s conduct, including alleged threats of transfer.