Collegium System
Evolution Through the Three Judges Cases
The word "consultation" in Article 217/124 was originally understood as non-binding advice to the President. Through a series of Supreme Court rulings collectively called the "Judges Cases," this was reinterpreted to mean binding concurrence, giving rise to the collegium system that operates today without direct textual basis in the Constitution.
- First Judges Case (S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981): held that "consultation" did not mean "concurrence," giving the executive primacy in appointments
- Second Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993): reversed this, holding that the CJI's opinion, formed after consulting senior-most judges, is binding on the President — origin of the collegium
- Third Judges Case (In re: Presidential Reference, 1998): expanded the collegium for Supreme Court appointments to the CJI plus four senior-most judges, and prescribed a similar mechanism for High Court appointments involving the CJI, two senior-most SC judges, and consultation with the concerned High Court's Chief Justice
- The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act (2014), which created the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to replace the collegium, was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India) as violative of the basic structure (judicial independence)
● Tracked since March 03, 2026 · last seen September 23, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes
09 Aug '26
Supreme Court Collegium Recommends Chief Justices for Four High Courts
Polity & Governance
01 Aug '26
Supreme Court Collegium's Opacity in Judicial Appointments Draws Fresh Scrutiny
Polity & Governance
See it in today’s brief.
Daily current affairs with every static concept explained in place.
Read the daily brief