By Janvi Patidar
How judges are appointed in India is back in focus after a private member Bill was introduced in Parliament to reform judicial appointments and improve diversity in the higher judiciary. The Bill also proposes regional benches of the Supreme Court to improve access to justice.
This renewed debate raises key questions. What does the Constitution say about appointing judges? Why was the collegium system created? Why did the Supreme Court strike down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)? And how can diversity and access be improved?
Let’s break it down in simple terms.
How Judges Are Appointed in India: What the Constitution Says
The Constitution lays down the basic framework for judicial appointments.
- Article 124: Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President after consulting the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
- Article 217: High Court judges are appointed by the President after consulting the CJI, the Chief Justice of the High Court, and the Governor of the State.
- Article 130: The Supreme Court sits in Delhi. The CJI may decide other locations with the approval of the Central Government.
On paper, the executive plays a role. In practice, the judiciary leads the process through the collegium system.
Also Read: https://vidhigya.com/blog/ethical-dilemmas-faced-by-civil-judges-and-their-resolution/
What Is the Collegium System?
Until the 1980s, the government had primacy in appointing judges. This changed after key Supreme Court rulings.
- First Judges Case (1981): The Court upheld executive primacy in appointments.
- Second Judges Case (1993): The Court reversed this view. It created the collegium system to protect judicial independence.
- Third Judges Case (1998): The Court clarified how the collegium would function.
How the Collegium Works
- For Supreme Court appointments: The collegium includes the CJI and four senior-most judges.
- For High Court appointments: The collegium includes the CJI and two senior-most judges.
The collegium recommends names to the Central Government.
The government can raise objections and return the file.
If the collegium reiterates its recommendation, the government must appoint the judge.
This system protects judicial independence.
However, it faces criticism for lack of transparency and allegations of nepotism.
Also Read: Supreme Court Reviews Doctors under Consumer Protection Act, 2019
https://vidhigya.com/blog/doctors-under-consumer-protection-act-2019/
Why Was NJAC Struck Down?
In 2014, Parliament by 99th Constitutional Amendment created the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to make appointments more participatory.
However, in NJAC judgment (2015), the Supreme Court struck it down for violating judicial independence, a part of the Constitution’s basic structure doctrine.
What Is the Private Member Bill on Judicial Diversity?
The private member Bill introduced by DMK MP P. Wilson proposes major changes.
1. Diversity in Judicial Appointments
The Bill points out that the higher judiciary does not reflect India’s social diversity.
Between 2018 and 2024:
- Only about 20% of judges belonged to SC, ST and OBC communities.
- Women made up less than 15%.
- Religious minorities were below 5%.
The Bill proposes that representation of SC, ST, OBC, minorities and women should be in proportion to their population.
2. Time Limit for Appointments
The Bill sets a 90-day timeline for the Central Government to notify collegium recommendations.
This aims to reduce delays in appointments.
Why Are Regional Benches of the Supreme Court Proposed?
The Supreme Court sits only in Delhi.
This creates access problems for citizens from distant States.
As of January 2026, over 90,000 cases remain pending in the Supreme Court.
The Bill proposes regional benches in:
- New Delhi
- Kolkata
- Mumbai
- Chennai
These benches would hear all cases except constitutional matters.
Constitutional cases would remain with the main bench in Delhi.
This reform aims to:
- Reduce pendency
- Improve access to justice
- Lower costs for litigants
