Context: SC Collegium recommends three judges to top court

Source: The Hindu

The Supreme Court collegium recommended the names of the Chief Justices of two High courts and a judge of the Bombay High Court for elevation to the Supreme Court.

The working strength of the Supreme Court Bench has been reduced to 31 with the retirement of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and A.S.Oka. It will further fall to 30 with the superannuation of Justice Bela Trivedi on June 9

The total sanctioned judicial strength of the top court is 34

The Collegium headed by Chief Justice of India B.R.Gavai, recommended Justice N.V.Anjaria, Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka; Justice Vijay Bishnoi, Chief Justice, Gauhati High Court; and Justice A.S.Chandurkar, Judge, Bombay High Court; to the top court.

Chief Justice Gavai has refused to the use the term ‘vacation’ and has often referred to the May-June holidays as ‘partial working days’ to emphasise that the judges of the top court are willing to work around the year to reduce pendency.

With the retirement of Justices Khanna and Oka, Justices J.K.Maheshwari and B.V.Nagarathna have become part of the collegium. Justice Nagarathna is expected to be the first woman Chief Justice of India in 2027.

Model Question:

The Collegium System of judicial appointments has been praised for ensuring judicial independence but criticized for lack of transparency and accountability. Critically examine the functioning of the Collegium System in India and suggest reforms for improving it.

Model Answer:

The Collegium System is a mechanism through which judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed and transferred. It evolved through judicial pronouncements, primarily the Second (1993) and Third Judges Cases (1998), making the judiciary itself the key player in appointments, with minimal executive intervention.

Merits of the Collegium System:

1. Judicial Independence: It insulates appointments from political interference, preserving the autonomy of the judiciary.
2. Continuity and Expertise: Judges, being part of the system, are better placed to assess the professional competence of prospective appointees.
3. Check on Executive Power: It prevents the executive from arbitrarily appointing politically aligned judges.

Criticisms:

1. Lack of Transparency: The criteria for selection or rejection are not publicly disclosed, leading to opaqueness.
2. No Accountability: The system lacks formal mechanisms for scrutiny or appeals.
3. Limited Diversity: Critics argue that the Collegium often favors certain social and professional backgrounds, undermining inclusivity.
4. Delays in Appointments: Prolonged vacancies in High Courts and the Supreme Court often result from disagreements or procedural delays.

Suggested Reforms:

1. Institutionalization of MoP (Memorandum of Procedure): A transparent and consistent framework can improve clarity.
2. Creation of a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC): With balanced representation from judiciary, executive, and civil society—while ensuring judicial primacy.
3. Public Disclosure: Making criteria and reasons for selection/non-selection public, without compromising privacy.
4. Diversity Mandates: Ensuring representation across gender, caste, and region.

While the Collegium System has upheld judicial independence, its lack of transparency and accountability undermines public trust. A reformed, transparent, and participatory process is essential to balance independence with accountability in a constitutional democracy.