IN A DEVELOPMENT indicating that not all is well within the higher judiciary, Supreme Court judge Sandeep Mehta has written to the Chief Justice of India (‘CJI’) Surya Kant seeking the replacement of Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, over allegations of manipulating the listing of cases and bullying fellow judges at the High Court.
In three letters dated August 2, 10 and 17, Justice Mehta has accused Justice Sharma of “maladministration”, “malpractices”, “nepotism” and “favouritism”, and alleged that he has been exercising his powers as master of the roster to selectively move cases to his own bench, Hindustan Times reported.
Justice Sharma has been functioning as Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court since September 28 last year. He is due to retire on September 26, 2026.
In a press statement, CJI Surya Kant said that he and the other Collegium members are already working on filling vacancies for Chief Justices across the remaining High Courts, and that he has taken note of the concerns raised in Justice Mehta’s letters. He stressed, however, that allegations against a sitting judge must be dealt with strictly through the established institutional mechanism, and that the contents of the letters cannot be adjudicated in the public domain.
He added that any decision on Justice Sharma’s continuation, transfer, or other administrative action would be taken by the competent institutional authority after due consideration. The CJI further emphasised that the Supreme Court cannot allow individual complaints concerning judges to be resolved through competing claims made in the media.
It remains unexplained why the Supreme Court Collegium could not recommend the appointment of a regular Chief Justice at the Rajasthan High Court for such a long time, more so when a sitting judge of the Supreme Court hailing from the Rajasthan High Court sent not one but three letters in all to the CJI highlighting allegations of manipulating the listing of cases to allegedly benefit rich litigants, threatening fellow judges, and his vindictive behaviour towards judicial officers. Equally unexplained is why, despite these serious allegations being on record with the CJI since early August, no transfer or interim administrative action has been taken against Justice Sharma so far, even as he continues to function as Acting Chief Justice.
As per the Memorandum of Procedure (‘MoP’), a judge in a High Court who has one year or less to retire when his turn for being considered for elevation as Chief Justice arrives may be considered for appointment as Chief Justice in his own High Court if a vacancy is to occur in the office of the Chief Justice in that High Court during that period.
Justice Mehta, in his letters, warned that the continuation of Justice Sharma at the Rajasthan High Court is wholly against the interest of the institution. He has alluded that efforts are being made to make Justice Sharma the regular Chief Justice at the Rajasthan High Court.
In his very first letter, LiveLaw reported, Justice Mehta said: “There are innumerable instances of Mr. Justice Sharma exercising powers as the Acting Chief Justice in a manner unbecoming of the leader of the institution… I have received several complaints about the judicial functioning of Mr. Justice S.P. Sharma which, prima facie, raise doubts on his integrity.”
Justice Mehta wrote that during his visits to Rajasthan, “numerous Judges of the Rajasthan High Court have met me and expressed their anguish at the behaviour of Mr. Justice S.P. Sharma, who frequently threatens his colleague judges of retributive action including transfer, claiming his closeness with Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India.”
Bar and Bench reported, citing the letters of Justice Mehta, that he specifically referred to two Division Bench orders of the Rajasthan High Court. In a batch of appeals over what Justice Mehta calls “priceless lands” in the city of Udaipur, the cases were listed before Justice Sharma’s own Bench at the Jaipur seat, despite an earlier judgment by Justice Sharma himself holding that such principal Bench matters at the Jodhpur seat could not be moved there.
In his letter of August 17, 2026, Justice Mehta highlighted that a sitting Rajasthan High Court judge Justice Uma Shankar Vyas, complained to fellow judges of vindictive conduct by Justice Sharma towards his wife, a senior district judiciary officer, Bar and Bench reported.
Bar and Bench reported that a separate complaint, written by advocate Pooja Tripathi to Supreme Court Justice Vikram Nath and copied to Justice Mehta among 16 others, alleges that Justice Sharma used his position as Acting Chief Justice to secure permanent Lok Adalat appointments in Jaipur and Ajmer for persons close to him, including a childhood friend and the spouses of two district judges.
The same complaint alleges that Justice Sharma also forwarded the names of four women advocates for elevation to the High Court. Tripathi has further stated that “none of these four lady advocates are in active practice,” each said to be linked to a senior lawyer or retired judge close to him.
Justice Sharma was appointed as a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in November 2016. The Supreme Court Collegium comprising the then CJI N.V. Ramana and Justices U.U.Lalit, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and L. Nageshwara Rao on September 16, 2021 decided to transfer Justice Sharma from the Rajasthan High Court to the Patna High Court. The recommendation was reiterated by the Collegium on September 21, 2021. He was eventually transferred to the Patna High Court on January 1, 2022, for the better administration of justice.
Justice Sharma later sought repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court on the ground of his poor health and the unavailability of adequate medical facilities at Patna.
On March 28, 2023, the Supreme Court Collegium headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, K.M. Joseph, M.R. Shah and Ajay Rastogi, rejected his request to repatriate him to the Rajasthan High Court and instead recommended his transfer to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
However, for some unknown reasons, on May 26, 2025, the Collegium headed by CJI B.R. Gavai and comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, J.K. Maheshwari and B.V. Nagarathna, sent Justice Sharma back to his parent High Court, that is, the Rajasthan High Court, where he became Acting Chief Justice by virtue of seniority last year. This meeting took place two days after the retirement of Justice Abhay S. Oka who retired on May 24, 2025 and was a member of the Collegium.
