Why in news?
The collegium system for judicial appointments in India is currently in the spotlight due to internal dissent within the Supreme Court regarding recent elevation recommendations.
Justice B.V. Nagarathna has strongly dissented against the collegium's move to elevate Patna High Court Chief Justice Vipul M. Pancholi to the Supreme Court, citing concerns about regional representation and precedent-setting.
 
Ongoing Debates and Controversies

• Transparency and Objectivity: Critics argue the collegium system is opaque and lacks accountability. The system is an outcome of Supreme Court judgments, not a constitutional requirement, and is often criticized for internal favoritism and insufficient consideration of merit across all High Courts.
• Calls for Reform: There continue to be strong demands for an overhaul. The Vice President and several legal commentators have raised objections, suggesting that greater executive or public involvement and transparent procedures are needed to ensure judicial independence without arbitrariness.
• Context of Delays and Criticism: Recent years have also seen executive-judiciary clashes, delays in appointments and transfers, and public criticisms of the collegium system by government officials. However, the Supreme Court has reiterated that the collegium process remains the binding law until changed formally.

About collegium system
The collegium system is the process by which judges are appointed and transferred in the higher judiciary, primarily in the Supreme Court and High Courts, through decisions made by a group of the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court—forming what is known as the "Collegium".
 
Historical Evolution

• The collegium system evolved through three landmark Supreme Court judgments: the First Judges Case (1981), Second Judges Case (1993), and Third Judges Case (1998).
• The system was designed in response to concerns over executive overreach and to ensure judicial independence, especially after the excesses witnessed during the Emergency period (1975–77).
• In the Second Judges Case (1993), the term "consultation" in constitutional provisions was interpreted as "concurrence", making the executive bound by the collegium's recommendations for judicial appointments.

Composition and Functioning

• The Collegium for Supreme Court appointments comprises the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the four most senior Supreme Court judges. For High Court appointments, it involves the CJI and two senior-most judges.
• The Collegium recommends names to the Central Government for judicial appointments and transfers. The government may return names for reconsideration, but if the collegium reiterates a recommendation, the government is constitutionally obliged to accept it.

Key Features

• No constitutional or statutory basis: The collegium system is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution or any law; it is a product of judicial interpretation.
• Ensures judicial primacy: The judiciary, not the executive or legislature, effectively has the final say in appointments to the higher judiciary.

Objective: Mainly to prevent undue executive interference and maintain judicial independence.
 
Criticisms and Controversies

• Lack of transparency and accountability: The process of selection is viewed as opaque, with little public information on criteria and reasons for appointments.
• Claims of nepotism and lack of diversity: Critics highlight the prevalence of the so-called "uncle judge syndrome"—where many appointees are related to established legal luminaries—and underrepresentation of women, Scheduled Castes, and other marginalized communities.
• Slow pace and executive-judiciary tussles: Delays in appointments often lead to vacancies and friction between the judiciary and the executive branches.

Later Developments

• Attempts to reform the system through the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) via a constitutional amendment were struck down as unconstitutional in 2015, reaffirming the collegium's primacy.
• Calls for reform continue, focusing mainly on increasing transparency, accountability, and social diversity within the judiciary.

Constitutional Articles Relevant to Collegium
 

Article	Scope
Article 124	Deals with the appointment of Supreme Court judges by the President after consultation with such judges as deemed necessary. The Chief Justice of India must be consulted for every appointment except his or her own.
Article 217	Relates to appointment of High Court judges by the President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the state, and the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court (for others, not for CJI).

 
Important Points

• These articles provide the constitutional foundation for judicial appointments, but do not mention the collegium system—which evolved through the First, Second, and Third Judges Cases as an interpretation of these articles to safeguard judicial independence.
• The Supreme Court, through its judgments, interpreted the word "consultation" in these articles to mean "concurrence," making the judiciary’s view binding on the executive with respect to appointments and transfers.

Related Provisions

• Article 222: Concerns the transfer of High Court judges.
• Article 50: Under Directive Principles, it aims to separate the judiciary from the executive to ensure independence.

Download Pdf