Why this matters now

Judicial appointments are a recurring GS-2 flashpoint — the collegium’s evolution, the NJAC verdict, and the MoP/transparency debate test the balance of judicial independence and accountability.

Three Judges Cases
Built collegium
Concurrence
“Consultation” meaning
NJAC 2015
Struck down
MoP
Pending

Evolution — the Three Judges Cases

The Constitution (Articles 124, 217) says judges are appointed by the President “in consultation with” the CJI. Through the Three Judges Cases (1981, 1993, 1998), the Supreme Court evolved the collegium system: “consultation” came to mean concurrence, and primacy in appointments shifted to a collegium of the CJI and senior-most judges.

The NJAC verdict

In 2014, the 99th Amendment created the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to involve the executive and eminent persons in appointments. In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC as violating judicial independence (a basic feature), restoring the collegium.

The continuing debate

The collegium is criticised for opacity, lack of accountability and delays; the executive is criticised for sitting on collegium recommendations. The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) reform remains unresolved. The challenge is a transparent system balancing judicial independence with accountability and diversity.

UPSC angle

Know Articles 124/217, the Three Judges Cases (consultation→concurrence→collegium), the 99th Amendment/NJAC and its 2015 striking-down (judicial independence), and the MoP/transparency debate.

Frequently asked questions

What is the collegium system?

A judge-led system, evolved through the Three Judges Cases, for appointing and transferring judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.

What was the NJAC?

The National Judicial Appointments Commission, created by the 99th Amendment (2014) to involve the executive in judicial appointments.

Why was the NJAC struck down?

The Supreme Court held in 2015 that it violated judicial independence, a basic feature of the Constitution.

What are the criticisms of the collegium?

Opacity, lack of accountability and delays — while the executive is criticised for delaying collegium recommendations.