July 17, 2026

In Search For A Perfect System To Appoint Judges

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2022-11-29 06:54:37

About the Author

Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack

View all posts by this Author

The battle lines have been drawn once again between the government and the judiciary, this time more seriously, over the process of appointment of judges. It all started at the Times Now summit when law minister Kiren Rijiju said that there are loopholes in the collegium system and it lacked transparency. More damningly, he asked the judiciary not to send the files for appointing judges if it felt that the government was 'sitting' on those files. The Supreme Court on its part reminded the government that the collegium system was the law of the land and the government was duty bound to follow it. It also reiterated that once the collegium resends a name sent back by the government, the latter had no option but to approve it as per law. It regretted that the government was also sitting on the names that were sent back to it after it had initially sent them back to the collegium for further review.

While both the government and the judiciary are right in their own way (since the government has not come up with a new National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) after the earlier one was scrapped by the Supreme Court and in its absence, the collegium system is the only way judges can be appointed at present), this tug of war is taking a huge toll on the judiciary since huge number of vacancies exist in high courts and the Supreme Court and this is increasing pendency of cases. Till the time the government comes up with an alternative mechanism of appointing judges and it is approved by the Supreme Court, it should not prevent appointment of judges, especially without disclosing the reasons for rejecting the names.

The government's charge that the collegium system is not transparent has merit. But the government needs to follow it as it is the law of the land. If it rejects a name, it has to give valid reasons for doing so within the time limit set by the Supreme Court in the comprehensive guidelines it issued last year. The collegium also has to consider the government's objections before resending a name rejected by the government. Aslo, the collegium has to be more transparent and disclose the manner in which names are selected and maintain minutes of the meetings. But a long term solution of this vexed issue can only be found if the government sits with the judiciary to find a middle ground and drafts a new law for appointments to the higher judiciary.