In the hallowed halls of the Indian Supreme Court, where justice is meant to be blind, a riveting drama unfolded in the late 1980s—one that only legal veterans still whisper about. It’s a tale of rivalry, unwritten conventions, and a single oath that altered the course of judicial history. At its heart were two towering figures: Justices A.M. Ahmadi and Kuldip Singh, whose simultaneous appointment on 14 December 1988 sparked a fierce contest for the coveted seat of Chief Justice of India (CJI). What followed was a saga of age controversies, regional loyalties, religious undertones, and the murky politics of judicial seniority—a story that proves even the highest court isn’t immune to human intrigue.
The Appointment That Set the Stage
On that fateful December day, Justices Ahmadi and Kuldip Singh joined the Supreme Court, but their paths to the bench couldn’t have been more different. Ahmadi, a seasoned judge from the Gujarat High Court, represented the traditional judicial ladder. Singh, a senior advocate appointed directly from the Bar, brought a fresh perspective but no prior judicial experience. By an unwritten convention, when a High Court judge and a Bar appointee are elevated on the same day, the judge from the judiciary takes seniority. By this logic, Ahmadi was the senior justice, poised to claim the CJI’s mantle in 1994.
But Kuldip Singh had other ideas. Born on 1 January 1932 (or so his official records claimed), he was two months older than Ahmadi, born on 25 March 1932. Singh argued that age, not judicial tenure, should determine seniority—a debate that wasn’t merely academic but a high-stakes battle for the CJI’s chair.
A Swearing-In That Shifted Fortunes
The stage was set for a resolution when then-CJI R.S. Pathak called Singh in August 1988, informing him of his appointment. Pathak assured Singh he would be sworn in first, securing his seniority over Ahmadi. But as the ceremony approached, politics intervened. At the eleventh hour, the government flipped the order. Ahmadi took the oath first, cementing his seniority. Singh, relegated to junior status, was livid.
Rumors swirled about the forces behind this last-minute switch.
A Retired Supreme Court Judge was said to have pulled strings to ensure his compatriot’s precedence. Singh, feeling betrayed, contemplated withdrawing his appointment altogether. Only Pathak’s persuasion kept him on the bench. Years later, Singh’s frustration surfaced in the cryptic words of the Second Judges case judgment: “No one knows how the inter-se seniority is fixed.” The sting of that moment never faded.
Legacies Forged in Rivalry
Despite the setback, Kuldip Singh carved a formidable legacy as the “Green Judge,” delivering landmark environmental rulings that reshaped India’s ecological jurisprudence. His passion for justice burned bright, but so did his resentment. In judgments and private conversations, Singh often alluded to the CJI’s seat that slipped through his fingers, a wound that never fully healed.
In the end, the Ahmadi–Singh rivalry isn’t just a story of two men—it’s a testament to how the smallest moments can cast the longest shadows over India’s constitutional history.
