Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra was sworn in as chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana high court on Monday morning, an event conspicuously skipped by Punjab chief minister Bhagwant Mann.
The oath of office was administered by Punjab governor Gulab Chand Kataria at Punjab Lok Bhawan.
The ceremony was attended by Haryana governor Ashim Kumar Ghosh, chief minister Nayab Singh Saini, sitting judges of the high court, and senior officials from both states. Shiromani Akali Dal MLA Ganieve Kaur Majithia was also present. Punjab chief secretary KAP Sinha conducted the proceedings. However, Mann and his cabinet colleagues were absent, leaving the chair reserved for the Punjab CM on the dais empty. Conventionally, chief ministers of both stakeholder states attend the swearing-in of a high court chief justice.
Mann, whose administration strongly objected to the Centre notifying the appointment without awaiting state feedback, left for New Delhi on Sunday night.
Following an emergency cabinet meeting on Sunday, the Punjab government opposed the elevation, alleging it violated Para 6 of the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP). The clause requires the state government’s views to be obtained post-Supreme Court Collegium recommendation and prior to sending the proposal to the Prime Minister for executive decision.
Demanding the swearing-in be paused, the state said it received a letter from Union minister of state for law Arjun Ram Meghwal on August 12 seeking consent. The collegium had recommended Justice Mishra’s name on August 6, but the notification was issued without waiting for Punjab’s input.
{{/usCountry}}Demanding the swearing-in be paused, the state said it received a letter from Union minister of state for law Arjun Ram Meghwal on August 12 seeking consent. The collegium had recommended Justice Mishra’s name on August 6, but the notification was issued without waiting for Punjab’s input.
{{/usCountry}}Countering these claims, additional solicitor general Satya Pal Jain termed the state’s stance “unfortunate and uncalled for,” emphasising that the President made the appointment under Article 217(1) of the Constitution. Jain said the procedure was strictly followed, adding that state views are non-binding and do not grant “veto” power over judicial appointments.
Justice Mishra had been serving as acting chief justice since June 2. Appointed as an additional judge of the Allahabad high court in February 2014, he served there until his transfer to the Punjab and Haryana high court in July 2025.
AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal had previously alleged on August 9 that the Collegium overlooked seniority in recommending Justice Mishra.
Punjab’s opposition comes in the backdrop of an August 3 order passed by a bench led by Justice Mishra. The court directed the cash-strapped Punjab government to clear pending dearness allowance (DA) to employees within a fortnight while barring “unproductive expenditures”, including major advertising campaigns, until dues were cleared. The state has challenged the ruling, which imposes an estimated ₹14,100 crore burden, in the Supreme Court. The appeal is yet to be listed for hearing.
State govt’s move unprecedented: Warring
Reacting to CM Mann’s objection, Punjab Congress president Amarinder Singh Raja Warring said this was unprecedented that the state government was opposing the appointment of an HC chief justice. “This amounts to trying to challenge and undermine the independence of the judiciary. Does AAP want a judiciary of its own choice?” he asked.
Judiciary not AAP’s political office: Chugh
BJP’s Rajya Sabha member Tarun Chugh slammed CM Mann, saying the Constitution does not give his government a “political veto” over the selection. In a post on X, Chugh said the judiciary is not the political office of the AAP, and its independence cannot be compromised to serve the political interests of the ruling party.
State’s view not binding on Centre: Former law minister
Former Union law minister Ashwani Kumar said the controversy should have been avoided as it negatively impacts inter-institutional and Centre-state relations. In a statement, he said that while the views of state governments are sought on the proposed appointment of high court judges, they are not binding on the Centre or the President.