A wave of concern has swept through the legal community in Karnataka following the proposed transfer of four sitting judges of the Karnataka High Court. Various lawyers' associations and members of the Bar have written to the Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, urging him to reconsider the decision, which they believe could significantly affect the administration of justice and the morale of the legal fraternity.
The Supreme Court Collegium has proposed the transfer of Justice Heman Chandanagoudar to the Madras High Court, Justice Krishnan Natarajan to the Kerala High Court, Justice Neranahalli Srinivasan Sanjay Gowda to the Gujarat High Court, and Justice Dixit Krishna Sripad to the Orissa High Court. The Collegium stated that the transfers are aimed at infusing inclusivity and diversity as well as strengthening the quality of administration of justice.
However, the move has sparked strong reactions from various quarters in Karnataka.
The Advocates Association at the High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench, in a letter dated April 17, expressed deep disappointment over the transfer recommendations. The Association highlighted that the Bar across Karnataka was "in a state of disbelief on hearing the rumours about the intended or proposed transfer of few of the best legal minds serving as Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Karnataka."
Quoting from the letter, the Association emphasized, “The members can vouch for their selfless service, unquestionable integrity, unmatched legal acumen, empathy and efficiency. It is indeed disheartening for the members of the bar and must be demoralizing for the judges who are known for utmost efficiency, sense of justice, equity and good conscience.”
The letter further warned that the proposed transfers could "deprive the members of the Bar and the litigant public" and would likely cause a "disruptive and crippling effect on the working of the High Court of Karnataka" while delivering a "deadly blow to the morale of the members of the Bar and the litigant public surely to be devastating."
Reinforcing its firm stand, the Association stated that the members of the Bar were unwilling to let go of these judges from the High Court of Karnataka" and called the transfer proposal retrogressive, suggesting it would act as a serious obstacle in the proper delivery of justice.
Similar concerns were echoed by the Advocates Association Bengaluru, which wrote to the Chief Justice of India on April 19. The letter urged the Chief Justice to grant an audience to the office bearers of the Association and senior counsels to present the sentiments of the legal fraternity in the state.
The Bengaluru Association pointed out, “It is learnt that consent is sought from some judges for transfer from Karnataka High Court to different High courts. Members of the Bar at Bangalore and Karnataka are unanimously against the transfer of many of the judges proposed for transfer. It is unfortunate that Judges who have been responsive to litigants, lawyers and who have been hard working are made part of the proposal for transfer. It will be tantamount to great injustice if such good and hardworking judges are transferred.”
The Association also stressed the practical difficulties that would arise from such abrupt transfers, noting that these judges were known for their dedication and efficiency in handling cases. It urged the Collegium to reconsider the transfer move, adding, "Therefore in view of the unanimous views and demand of the Advocate fraternity, we request the collegium to immediately withdraw the proposed transfer as the entire Bangalore Bar is against to the said proposal."
Adding to the collective voice, around 200 junior advocates practicing at the Karnataka High Court also wrote to Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna on April 19. Their letter conveyed deep concern about the impact of the proposed transfers on the judicial environment, especially for young lawyers.
The junior advocates highlighted the judges’ reputation for fairness, discipline, and their supportive approach towards young members of the Bar. They shared that the judges in question had fostered courtrooms where junior advocates were heard patiently, with decisions based purely on the merit of their arguments — a practice they described as “a rare and invaluable judicial temperament.”
The letter also underlined the advocates' unease over the absence of any stated reasons for the proposed transfers, especially since the judges had consistently demonstrated integrity, impartiality, and efficiency in their judicial roles.
The advocates acknowledged the wisdom and authority of the Supreme Court Collegium, but felt it was their responsibility to raise their voice "not as critics, but as beneficiaries of a judicial environment that encourages learning, merit, and ethical lawyering.”
They concluded their appeal by urging the Chief Justice to ensure transparency and reconsider the proposed transfers, stating that such a move is essential to preserve public confidence in the independence and institutional integrity of the judiciary.
This growing opposition from the legal fraternity in Karnataka underscores the complex nature of judicial transfers and highlights the significance of maintaining stability, fairness, and public trust in the judicial process.
