Overview and Constitutional Provisions:
The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court of India is governed primarily by Articles 124(2) and 124(3) of the Constitution of India. The President of India appoints Supreme Court judges after consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and other senior judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. The Constitution ensures that appointments are made based on merit, experience, and integrity, thereby maintaining the independence of the judiciary. Judges can serve until the age of 65, as specified under Article 124(2), ensuring a fixed tenure while protecting the judiciary from arbitrary removal. This procedure embodies the principle of separation of powers, giving the judiciary autonomy while involving the executive and judiciary in a consultative process.
Collegium System and Legal Framework:
While the Constitution mentions consultation with senior judges, the Supreme Court in the Second Judges Case (1993) and subsequent Third Judges Case (1998) evolved the Collegium system, where appointments are made by a forum of the CJI and senior Supreme Court judges. This system ensures that merit, experience, and judicial propriety are prioritized over political considerations. The Appointments of Supreme Court Judges (Procedure) Rules, 1998 supplement this system, outlining procedures for recommending names, seeking feedback, and processing appointments. While the President formally appoints judges, the Collegium’s recommendation is considered binding, making the process a blend of executive formalities and judicial independence.
Significance and Limitations:
The appointment procedure ensures the judiciary’s independence, competence, and integrity, which are critical for upholding the Constitution. However, it has faced criticism for a lack of transparency, as the Collegium operates without codified criteria. The Supreme Court has emphasized that appointments should focus on merit, representation, and regional balance while maintaining confidentiality to protect judicial propriety. Additionally, judges can be removed only by impeachment under Article 124(4) for proven misbehavior or incapacity, which underscores the security of tenure. This framework balances independence with accountability and maintains public confidence in the Supreme Court.
Real-Time Example:
A notable example is the appointment of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud as Chief Justice of India in 2022, where the Collegium recommended his name following seniority and merit. The recommendation was sent to the President for formal appointment. Similarly, controversies over delayed appointments or disagreements between the executive and Collegium, such as in 2015, highlight how these consultations and recommendations shape the judiciary while emphasizing the importance of timely appointments for smooth functioning of the Supreme Court.
Mnemonic to Remember:
Mnemonic: “PRESIDENT CONSULTS CJI & COLLEGIUM”
- P = President appoints formally
- C = Consultation with Chief Justice
- C = Collegium system recommends names
- M = Merit, experience, integrity prioritized
This phrase helps recall the constitutional basis, the consultative process, and the principle of judicial independence in appointing Supreme Court judges.
About lawgnan:
Explore the appointment process of Supreme Court judges in India in detail at Lawgnan.in. Understand how Articles 124(2) and 124(3) of the Constitution, along with the Collegium System, ensure merit-based and independent judicial appointments. Lawgnan explains landmark cases such as the Second Judges Case (1993) and Third Judges Case (1998) that shaped the current system. Learn how the President, Chief Justice of India, and senior judges collaborate to maintain judicial integrity and constitutional balance. Perfect for law students and aspirants seeking clarity on India’s judicial appointment process.
