Justice Sandeep Mehta Alleges ‘Listing Manipulation’ In Rajasthan HC, Urges CJI To Appoint New Chief Justice
Supreme Court Justice Sandeep Mehta urged CJI Surya Kant to appoint a Chief Justice from another State to head the Rajasthan High Court, alleging misuse of administrative powers and manipulation of case listings by Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Justice Sandeep Mehta urged CJI Surya Kant to appoint a new Chief Justice for the Rajasthan High Court, alleging administrative irregularities and case listing manipulation
Supreme Court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta has urged Chief Justice of India Surya Kant to appoint, with immediate effect, a Chief Justice from another State to head the Rajasthan High Court, alleging that its Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma has been misusing administrative powers and manipulating case listings to allegedly favour “rich litigants.”
Justice Mehta made the allegations in three letters dated August 2, 10 and 17 addressed to the CJI. The letters, as per reports, raise several concerns regarding the functioning of the Rajasthan High Court under Justice Sharma.
The allegations made by Justice Mehta and those contained in complaints referred to in his letters have not been adjudicated upon.
Justice Sharma, who was appointed to the Rajasthan High Court in November 2016, was transferred to the Patna High Court in 2022 and subsequently to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. A Collegium resolution in May 2025 recommended his return to Rajasthan, following which he became the Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court.
According to Justice Mehta, Justice Sharma has held the position for more than 10 months.
Justice Mehta cites concerns raised by Rajasthan HC Judges
In his August 2 letter, Justice Mehta stated that several judges of the Rajasthan High Court had met him during his visits to the State and expressed “anguish” over Justice Sharma’s conduct.
Justice Mehta claimed that the judges had alleged that Justice Sharma frequently threatened fellow judges with retaliatory action, including transfers, while asserting his proximity to the CJI.
He also referred to a recent Supreme Court observation in an unrelated case concerning the possibility of judges passing orders influenced by extraneous considerations as their retirement approaches.
Against this backdrop, Justice Mehta wrote that Justice Sharma “seems to be possessed of a licence to hit sixes ever since the day on which he took over as the Acting Chief Justice.”
Udaipur land cases cited over alleged listing concerns
Justice Mehta also referred to two Division Bench orders concerning what he described as “priceless lands” in Udaipur.
According to his letter, a batch of appeals relating to the land was listed before a bench headed by Justice Sharma at the Jaipur Bench, despite an earlier judgment authored by Justice Sharma holding that matters concerning the principal seat could not be transferred from Jodhpur to Jaipur.
Justice Mehta has raised this as an instance requiring scrutiny of the manner in which matters were being listed administratively.
Complaint concerning alleged "vindictive conduct"
Justice Mehta’s August 17 letter also referred to an alleged complaint by sitting Rajasthan High Court judge Justice Uma Shankar Vyas concerning what was described as “vindictive conduct” by Justice Sharma towards his wife, a senior judicial officer in the district judiciary.
According to the complaint cited by Justice Mehta, Justice Sharma allegedly delayed the inauguration of a new court building in Jodhpur. Justice Mehta described the alleged delay as causing an “unpardonable” loss to the institution.
The allegations remain claims and have not been judicially determined.
Justice Mehta also referred to a separate complaint by Advocate Pooja Tripathi addressed to Supreme Court judge Justice Vikram Nath and copied to Justice Mehta and several others.
The complaint alleged that Justice Sharma had used his position to secure permanent Lok Adalat appointments in Jaipur and Ajmer for persons close to him.
It further alleged that those appointed included a childhood friend of Justice Sharma and spouses of two district judges.
The complaint also alleged that Justice Sharma had forwarded the names of four women advocates for elevation to the High Court despite an assertion that they were not actively practising. The complaint claimed that the advocates had connections with senior lawyers or retired judges close to Justice Sharma.
These allegations too remain unproven.
Justice Mehta seeks immediate transfer of Acting CJ
Justice Mehta’s letters further alleged that efforts were being made to “confirm” Justice Sharma as Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court despite what he described as “damning evidence”.
He consequently urged the CJI and the Collegium to immediately transfer Justice Sharma out of Rajasthan and appoint a Chief Justice from another State.
Justice Mehta said such a step was necessary “to save the Institution from further carnage” and warned that continued inaction would be against the interests of the institution.
Justice Mehta has longstanding links with the Rajasthan High Court. He was appointed as a judge of the High Court in May 2011 and later served as Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court from February 2023 before being elevated to the Supreme Court in November 2023.