SC Collegium recommends new CJs for Rajasthan, MP, J&K and Chhattisgarh
The Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for the High Courts of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, and Chhattisgarh
Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal of the Chhattisgarh High Court was recommended as Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court
Justice Alpesh Yeshvant Kogje of the Gujarat High Court was recommended as Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court
Justice Dr Pushpendra Singh Bhati of the Rajasthan High Court was recommended as Chief Justice of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, and Justice Krushna Ram Mohapatra of the Orissa High Court was recommended as Chief Justice of the Chhattisgarh High Court, ahead of the incumbent's scheduled retirement on September 4
The Rajasthan recommendation follows the Rajasthan High Court's acting Chief Justice opting out of judicial work, after a sitting Supreme Court judge raised concerns about case-listing practices and administrative functioning in a communication to the Chief Justice of India
The Collegium System — Evolution Through the Three Judges Cases
The collegium system for appointing and transferring High Court and Supreme Court judges is a judicially evolved mechanism, not an explicit constitutional or statutory creation. It emerged from three landmark Supreme Court rulings collectively called the Three Judges Cases (1981, 1993, 1998), which progressively shifted primacy in judicial appointments from the executive to the judiciary.
The four recommendations announced this week are collegium decisions under this judicially evolved procedure — each name moves next through the Union government's processing before a Presidential warrant of appointment is issued.
Article 217 — Appointment and Transfer of High Court Judges
Article 217 of the Constitution provides that every High Court judge is appointed by the President by warrant, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the state, and (for judges other than the Chief Justice) the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned. Transfers of judges between High Courts are separately governed under Article 222.
Key Details
- Article 217 governs first appointment/elevation to a High Court, including as Chief Justice
- Article 222 empowers the President to transfer a judge from one High Court to another after consultation with the CJI — the mechanism used when a sitting judge from one High Court is elevated to head another (as recommended here for the Rajasthan, MP, and J&K/Ladakh posts)
- The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP), evolved after the Second and Third Judges Cases, lays down the detailed process for both appointment and transfer recommendations
All four recommendations involve transferring a sitting judge from one High Court to head another as Chief Justice — the standard Collegium practice of avoiding appointment of a Chief Justice from within the same High Court, to preserve impartiality in administrative functioning.
In-House Procedure — Judicial Accountability Short of Impeachment
Complaints against sitting judges of the higher judiciary, including allegations of misconduct or administrative impropriety, are handled through the "in-house procedure" mechanism established by the Supreme Court in 1999 — distinct from the constitutional impeachment process under Articles 124(4)/218, which is reserved for proven misbehaviour or incapacity.
Key Details
- The in-house procedure allows the Chief Justice of India to constitute a committee to examine complaints against judges, without resorting to the higher, cumbersome bar of impeachment
- Impeachment under Article 124(4) requires a motion passed by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament, following an inquiry under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 — a route rarely completed to conclusion
- Outcomes under the in-house procedure can range from a clean chit to a recommendation that a judge not be assigned judicial work, or in serious cases, a recommendation for resignation/impeachment
The Rajasthan acting Chief Justice's decision to step back from judicial work, following concerns raised by a sitting Supreme Court judge about listing practices, reflects the kind of internal accountability process that precedes and often substitutes for the far more difficult constitutional impeachment route.
- Four High Courts covered: Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Chhattisgarh
- Collegium composition for Supreme Court-level decisions: CJI + 4 senior-most Supreme Court judges (since the Third Judges Case, 1998)
- Second Judges Case: 1993; Third Judges Case: 1998
- NJAC (99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014) struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 by a 4:1 majority, restoring the collegium system
- Incumbent Chhattisgarh High Court Chief Justice's retirement date cited: September 4