SC judge urges CJI to replace Rajasthan HC Acting CJ

Perhaps for the first time a rare controversy has emerged within the judiciary when a Supreme Court judge  has asked Chief Justice of India to act against an acting Chief Justice of a High Court. SC Justice Sandeep Mehta wrote to CJI Surya Kant, seeking a change in leadership at the Rajasthan High Court. His letters alleged misuse of administrative powers by Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma. It is said that ustice Sandeep Mehta has written three letters to CJI Surya Kant this month seeking the immediate replacement of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma.The letters, written on August 2, 10 and 17, 2026, have also been forwarded to other members of the Supreme Court Collegium and the President of India.
Justice Mehta, who was elevated to the Supreme Court from the Rajasthan High Court, has accused Justice Sharma of exercising powers “in a manner unbecoming of the leader of the institution,” raising prima facie doubts about his integrity, and continuing in office despite repeated concerns. 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.
In his first letter, Justice Mehta stated that he had received several complaints about Justice Sharma’s judicial functioning. During visits to Rajasthan, several High Court judges had expressed anguish over the Acting Chief Justice’s alleged threats of retributive action, including transfers, while claiming closeness to the Chief Justice of India.
In his second letter, dated August 10, Justice Mehta reportedly put forward two specific instances which he described as “living proof” of Justice Sharma’s attempts to “hit longer sixes” before his retirement on September 26. These included the handling of a batch of appeals, an order condoning a 457-day delay in a special appeal, and the court’s conduct in a criminal matter.Justice Mehta described the cumulative effect as misuse of roster powers and position. 
In the August 17 communication, he questioned why Justice Sharma had been allowed to continue as Acting Chief Justice for an unusually long period of ten months? He recalled that the Supreme Court Collegium had in March 2023 refused Justice Sharma’s request for repatriation to the Rajasthan High Court—after his earlier transfer to the Patna High Court—and had instead proposed a move to the Punjab and Haryana High Court, apparently in view of past conduct.The Collegium later permitted his return to Rajasthan in May 2026, a decision Justice Mehta termed “beyond comprehension.
Justice Mehta has urged the Collegium to meet at the earliest, appoint a regular Chief Justice from another High Court, and transfer Justice Sharma out of Rajasthan, arguing that continued inaction is “wholly against the interest of the Institution.” Justice S Shriram was appointed Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court in July 2025 and demitted office in September that year. Justice Sharma has since been functioning as acting Chief Justice for more than 10 months. Justice, who hailed from the Rajasthan High Court, was elevated to the Supreme Court on November 9, 2023.