Appointment of Chief Justice

The Constitution of the Republic, vide Article 48 read with Article 95, confers upon the president full and unfettered discretionary powers to appoint the chief justice and he is not supposed to seek, or act on, the advice of the prime minister in the matter of appointment of the chief justice. And the president is not bound by any law to appoint the senior most judge of the Appellate Division as the chief justice -- an inherent deficiency in our Constitution. Hence, strictly speaking from legal point of view, the appointment cannot be questioned. But the comment of the law minister quoted above goes to suggest that the government, not the president, made the selection which like other businesses of the government was approved by the latter as a matter of routine. Does it not constitute a violation of the Constitution?