Collegium System in India: Evolution, Issues and Judicial Reforms

3 Jul 2026

GS II: Structure, Organization and Functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary—Ministries and Departments of the Government;

Context: The article discusses the Collegium System, India’s mechanism for appointing judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. It examines the evolution of the system, its strengths, criticisms, and the reforms required to enhance transparency and accountability.

What is the Collegium System?

The Collegium System is a judicial mechanism through which judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed and transferred.

It comprises:

Chief Justice of India (CJI)
Four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court

The Collegium recommends appointments and transfers, while the President of India formally appoints the judges.

Best Online Coaching for UPSC

Constitutional Status

The Constitution of India does not mention the Collegium System.
It evolved through judicial interpretation by the Supreme Court.

Hence, it is a judge-made system.

Evolution of the Collegium System

1. First Judges Case (1981)

P. Gupta v. Union of India

The Executive had primacy in judicial appointments.
The CJI’s opinion was not binding.

2. Second Judges Case (1993)

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India

Reversed the First Judges Case.
Established the Collegium System.
Held that the Chief Justice of India, along with the two senior-most judges, would have primacy in judicial appointments.

3. Third Judges Case (1998)

Re Presidential Reference

Expanded the Collegium.
Increased its strength from 3 members to 5 members:
- Chief Justice of India
- Four senior-most Supreme Court judges

This is the system followed today.

Attempt to Replace the Collegium

National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)

To reform judicial appointments, Parliament enacted:

99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014
National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014

The objective was to create a commission comprising members from both the judiciary and the executive.

NJAC Judgment (2015)

In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, the Supreme Court:

Declared the 99th Constitutional Amendment unconstitutional.
Struck down the NJAC Act.
Restored the Collegium System.

Reason

The Court held that judicial independence is a part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution, and excessive executive involvement could undermine it.

Criticisms of the Collegium System

1. Lack of Accountability

The Collegium is not institutionally accountable for its decisions.
Reasons for selecting or rejecting candidates are often not disclosed.
There is no formal mechanism to review or appeal its decisions.

2. Lack of Transparency

The appointment process is conducted behind closed doors.
No publicly available objective evaluation criteria.
Limited disclosure of deliberations and reasons for recommendations.
Opaque decision-making undermines public confidence.

3. Absence of Objective Selection Criteria

No comprehensive framework to assess candidates on:
- Merit
- Integrity
- Judicial temperament
- Domain expertise
- Administrative ability
Creates uncertainty and perceptions of subjectivity in appointments.

UPSC Online Courses

4. Allegations of Nepotism

Criticised for favouring:
- Relatives of judges
- Members of influential legal families
- Senior lawyers with established judicial connections
This phenomenon is commonly referred to as the “Uncle Judge Syndrome.”

5. Overlooking Meritorious Candidates

Several deserving judges have allegedly been overlooked without publicly stated reasons.
Raises concerns regarding:
- Fairness
- Consistency
- Merit-based selection

6. Lack of Diversity

Gender Diversity: Low representation of women in the higher judiciary.
Social Diversity: Limited representation of marginalized and underrepresented communities.
Regional Diversity: Uneven representation from different States and High Courts, affecting the judiciary’s inclusiveness.

Why is Some Degree of Secrecy Necessary?

Arguments in Favour of Confidentiality in the Collegium System

Protects Judicial Independence
- Confidential deliberations reduce the risk of political interference, executive pressure, and external influence.
- Enable judges to make decisions independently and impartially.
Preserves the Dignity of Candidates
- Public discussion of a candidate’s shortcomings may damage professional reputation.
- Prevents unnecessary public embarrassment and protects judicial dignity.
- Safeguards unsuccessful candidates from reputational harm.
Prevents Lobbying and External Pressure
- Limits the scope for media campaigns and political lobbying.
- Reduces pressure from interest groups and public opinion.
- Helps preserve the integrity and impartiality of the judicial appointment process.

Way Forward

Adopt Transparent Selection Criteria
- Clearly publish eligibility standards, evaluation parameters, and broad reasons for selection.
- Enhance transparency and strengthen public confidence in judicial appointments.
Introduce Objective Assessment: Evaluate candidates based on:
- Merit
- Integrity
- Judicial competence
- Commitment to constitutional values
- Professional experience
Publish Dissenting Opinions
- Disclose dissenting views of Collegium members, wherever appropriate, without revealing sensitive or confidential information.
- Promote transparency while preserving institutional credibility.
Pursue Internal Judicial Reforms: The judiciary should proactively reform the Collegium system to:
- Increase transparency
- Enhance accountability
- Preserve judicial independence
- Strengthen public trust in the justice delivery system.
Improve Diversity: Ensure greater representation of:
- Women
- Scheduled Castes (SCs)
- Scheduled Tribes (STs)
- Other Backward Classes (OBCs)
- Minorities
- Different regions and High Courts
A diverse judiciary enhances legitimacy, inclusiveness, and public trust.

Advantages of the Collegium System	Disadvantages of the Collegium System
Protects judicial independence.	Opaque functioning and limited transparency.
Minimizes executive interference in judicial appointments.	Lack of accountability for appointment decisions.
Upholds the Basic Structure Doctrine by preserving judicial independence.	No explicit statutory or constitutional backing.
Ensures judges play a central role in selecting future judges, preserving institutional autonomy.	Possibility of nepotism and the “Uncle Judge Syndrome.”
Safeguards the Separation of Powers by preventing executive dominance.	Inadequate representation of women, marginalized communities, and regions.
Helps insulate appointments from political considerations.	Absence of objective and measurable selection criteria.

Click to Know UPSC Offline Courses

Conclusion

The Collegium System has played a vital role in safeguarding judicial independence, a cornerstone of India’s constitutional democracy. However, concerns relating to opacity, accountability, diversity, and institutional credibility necessitate reforms.

The way forward lies not in weakening judicial independence but in making the appointment process more transparent, objective, inclusive, and accountable, while preserving the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

Practice Mains:

Q. The Collegium system of India is often described as an imperfect necessity. Analyze the vulnerabilities of the current system and suggest intra-judiciary reforms to balance transparency with judicial independence. (15 Marks, 250 Words)

Check Out UPSC CSE Books

Visit PW Store