Supreme Court Collegium recommends appointment of 12 additional judges as permanent judges in four High Courts
The Supreme Court Collegium recommended the appointment of 12 Additional Judges as Permanent Judges across four High Courts — Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Uttarakhand, and Gauhati (Guwahati).
The recommendations cover five judges each for the Andhra Pradesh and Kerala High Courts, and one judge each for the Uttarakhand and Gauhati High Courts.
Among those recommended, Justice Subhash Upadhyay, currently an Additional Judge, was recommended for appointment as a Permanent Judge of the Uttarakhand High Court.
The Collegium took these decisions at a meeting held on 23 September 2026.
The Collegium for this round of recommendations comprised the Chief Justice of India and two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
Article 217 — Appointment of High Court Judges
Article 217 of the Constitution provides for the appointment of High Court judges by the President, after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the state concerned, and (for appointments other than the Chief Justice of that High Court) the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned. A High Court judge holds office until the age of 62 years. The "consultation" process under Article 217 has, since the Second and Third Judges Cases, been interpreted to mean the binding recommendation of the Collegium.
The 12 recommendations reported are Collegium recommendations under the Article 217 process — the final step (formal Presidential appointment) still requires the Government's warrant of appointment following the Collegium's recommendation.
Article 224 — Additional and Acting Judges, and Their Conversion to Permanent Judges
Article 224 empowers the President to appoint Additional Judges to a High Court when there is a temporary increase in the court's business or an arrears backlog, for a term not exceeding two years. Additional Judges perform the same functions as Permanent Judges but hold a time-bound, renewable appointment rather than tenure until the retirement age. When an Additional Judge's performance and the court's continuing need for judicial strength justify it, the Chief Justice of the High Court recommends conversion to a Permanent Judge post — a recommendation that must be accompanied by detailed disposal statistics (cases decided, judgments reported, attendance record) for the Collegium's assessment.
Key Details
- Governing provision: Article 224(1) — appointment of Additional Judges for a term not exceeding two years
- An Additional Judge cannot continue in office after attaining the age of 62 years
- Conversion to Permanent Judge requires a fresh recommendation and Collegium scrutiny of the judge's disposal record — it is not automatic
- Article 224A (a separate provision) allows the President to request a retired judge to sit and act as an Ad Hoc judge of a High Court, distinct from Additional Judges
The 12 judges recommended were serving as Additional Judges under Article 224 before this Collegium round; the recommendation now sought is to convert their status to Permanent Judges under Article 217, following the standard scrutiny of their judicial performance.
The Collegium System and the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP)
High Court and Supreme Court judge appointments in India are made through the Collegium system, a judiciary-led mechanism evolved through the Second Judges Case (1993) and Third Judges Case (1998), under which the CJI, in consultation with senior Supreme Court judges, makes binding recommendations to the Government. The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) lays down the detailed steps by which recommendations move between the High Court Collegium, the Supreme Court Collegium, and the Government before a final Presidential appointment.
Key Details
- Evolved via: Second Judges Case (1993) and Third Judges Case (1998) — collectively established primacy of the judiciary's Collegium in appointments
- Composition for Supreme Court Collegium recommendations on High Court judges: CJI plus the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court (a larger five-member Collegium decides Supreme Court judge appointments)
- The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), introduced by the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, sought to replace the Collegium system but was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 as violative of the basic structure (independence of judiciary)
- Final appointment requires a Presidential warrant after Government processing of the Collegium's recommendation
This round of recommendations — covering Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Uttarakhand, and Gauhati High Courts — follows the standard Collegium-MoP process; the recommendations now go to the Government for further processing before formal Presidential appointment.
- Collegium meeting date: 23 September 2026
- Total judges recommended for permanent appointment: 12, across 4 High Courts
- Break-up: Andhra Pradesh HC — 5; Kerala HC — 5; Uttarakhand HC — 1 (Justice Subhash Upadhyay); Gauhati HC — 1 (Justice Kaushik Goswami)
- Constitutional basis: Article 217 (permanent appointment), Article 224 (additional judge status being converted)
- High Court judges' retirement age: 62 years (Article 217); Supreme Court judges: 65 years (Article 124)
- Collegium system origin: Second Judges Case (1993), reaffirmed and expanded by Third Judges Case (1998)